Tara Kirk Sell1,2, Divya Hosangadi3,4, Marc Trotochaud3,4. 1. Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, Baltimore, USA. tksell@jhu.edu. 2. Department of Environmental Health and Engineering Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA. tksell@jhu.edu. 3. Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, Baltimore, USA. 4. Department of Environmental Health and Engineering Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Ebola communication crisis of 2014 generated widespread fear and attention among Western news media, social media users, and members of the United States (US) public. Health communicators need more information on misinformation and the social media environment during a fear-inducing disease outbreak to improve communication practices. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of Ebola-related tweets with a specific focus on misinformation, political content, health related content, risk framing, and rumors. METHODS: We examined tweets from a random 1% sample of all tweets published September 30th - October 30th, 2014, filtered for English-language tweets mentioning "Ebola" in the content or hashtag, that had at least 1 retweet (N = 72,775 tweets). A randomly selected subset of 3639 (5%) tweets were evaluated for inclusion. We analyzed the 3113 tweets that meet inclusion criteria using public health trained human coders to assess tweet characteristics (joke, opinion, discord), veracity (true, false, partially false), political context, risk frame, health context, Ebola specific messages, and rumors. We assessed the proportion of tweets with specific content using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests. RESULTS: Of non-joke tweets, 10% of Ebola-related tweets contained false or partially false information. Twenty-five percent were related to politics, 28% contained content that provoked reader response or promoted discord, 42% contained risk elevating messages and 72% were related to health. The most frequent rumor mentioned focused on government conspiracy. When comparing tweets with true information to tweets with misinformation, a greater percentage of tweets with misinformation were political in nature (36% vs 15%) and contained discord-inducing statements (45% vs 10%). Discord-inducing statements and political messages were both significantly more common in tweets containing misinformation compared with those without(p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the importance of anticipating politicization of disease outbreaks, and the need for policy makers and social media companies to build partnerships and develop response frameworks in advance of an event. While each public health event is different, our findings provide insight into the possible social media environment during a future epidemic and could help optimize potential public health communication strategies.
BACKGROUND: The Ebola communication crisis of 2014 generated widespread fear and attention among Western news media, social media users, and members of the United States (US) public. Health communicators need more information on misinformation and the social media environment during a fear-inducing disease outbreak to improve communication practices. The purpose of this study was to describe the content of Ebola-related tweets with a specific focus on misinformation, political content, health related content, risk framing, and rumors. METHODS: We examined tweets from a random 1% sample of all tweets published September 30th - October 30th, 2014, filtered for English-language tweets mentioning "Ebola" in the content or hashtag, that had at least 1 retweet (N = 72,775 tweets). A randomly selected subset of 3639 (5%) tweets were evaluated for inclusion. We analyzed the 3113 tweets that meet inclusion criteria using public health trained human coders to assess tweet characteristics (joke, opinion, discord), veracity (true, false, partially false), political context, risk frame, health context, Ebola specific messages, and rumors. We assessed the proportion of tweets with specific content using descriptive statistics and chi-squared tests. RESULTS: Of non-joke tweets, 10% of Ebola-related tweets contained false or partially false information. Twenty-five percent were related to politics, 28% contained content that provoked reader response or promoted discord, 42% contained risk elevating messages and 72% were related to health. The most frequent rumor mentioned focused on government conspiracy. When comparing tweets with true information to tweets with misinformation, a greater percentage of tweets with misinformation were political in nature (36% vs 15%) and contained discord-inducing statements (45% vs 10%). Discord-inducing statements and political messages were both significantly more common in tweets containing misinformation compared with those without(p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Results highlight the importance of anticipating politicization of disease outbreaks, and the need for policy makers and social media companies to build partnerships and develop response frameworks in advance of an event. While each public health event is different, our findings provide insight into the possible social media environment during a future epidemic and could help optimize potential public health communication strategies.
Entities:
Keywords:
Communication; Ebola; Infectious disease; Misinformation; Social media; Twitter
Authors: Kai Kisielinski; Paul Giboni; Andreas Prescher; Bernd Klosterhalfen; David Graessel; Stefan Funken; Oliver Kempski; Oliver Hirsch Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2021-04-20 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Valentina Lorenzoni; Gianni Andreozzi; Andrea Bazzani; Virginia Casigliani; Salvatore Pirri; Lara Tavoschi; Giuseppe Turchetti Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2022-06-24 Impact factor: 4.614
Authors: Abdullah Bin Shams; Ehsanul Hoque Apu; Ashiqur Rahman; Md Mohsin Sarker Raihan; Nazeeba Siddika; Rahat Bin Preo; Molla Rashied Hussein; Shabnam Mostari; Russell Kabir Journal: Healthcare (Basel) Date: 2021-02-03
Authors: Jennifer L Scheid; Shannon P Lupien; Gregory S Ford; Sarah L West Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-12 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Madison Stoddard; Debra Van Egeren; Kaitlyn E Johnson; Smriti Rao; Josh Furgeson; Douglas E White; Ryan P Nolan; Natasha Hochberg; Arijit Chakravarty Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2021-04-30 Impact factor: 3.295