When it comes to Covid-19, ignorance is not bliss
(Shutterstock)
We live in nervy times. With the world in the midst of the coronavirus outbreak, and despite the best efforts of (most) governments to slow its progress, it is hard to process the severity of what’s going on. For any of us to know how to respond gets more difficult with every passing day. It is times like this that we need leaders to lead.
As ever in such circumstances, the media is a crucial gatekeeper of information. It is incumbent on all in the industry to behave responsibly. Journalists need to communicate the seriousness of the situation, while also not inducing further panic. It is undoubtedly a difficult balance to strike, but I’ve been rather disconcerted about the increasingly frantic coverage from a number of outlets. Do we need dramatic breaking news push alerts to our mobile phones every time new cases are confirmed? I’m not so sure. Knowing the numbers is crucial, of course, but constant updates like this actually make things feel like they have escalated further than they currently have.
The need to strike a balance is particularly pertinent for the tabloids. These papers thrive on providing eye-catching headlines and exciting copy for their readers. It’s great — I love reading tabloids, as do millions of others. However, surely they need to approach reporting on a serious virus in a different manner to how they cover say, the latest celebrity news? That doesn’t really seem to be happening. For example, one story from the Sun, posted online on Sunday under the headline “BUG EXPLOSION”, said:
“UK coronavirus cases rocket to 273 in biggest 24-hour increase yet after warning 100,000 Brits could die”.
Its somewhat more stoic stablemate, the Sunday Times, presented that same information in a much more responsible manner. The story in that paper read:
“Officials in Whitehall last week began describing a 100,000 figure as the ‘central estimate’ of the potential death toll, according to a source involved in the preparations, rather than the previously publicised worst case scenario of 500,000 deaths if 80 per cent of the population were infected.”
That is good public service reporting without any need to hype up the situation. I know they are two very different styles of newspapers, but given their popularity and reach, tabloids need to be very careful that they are not just inducing fear.
Other publications are doing this too. Politico, the usually fairly wonky political news outlet, has just begun a daily coronavirus email briefing. Now, I accept that Politico is a bit of an outlier — its core audience tends to be influential insiders who will likely have a decent handle on the reality of the situation, but could probably benefit from a summary of all the information flying about. However, the approach taken by Politico also feels like a way of adding to the “drama” instead of simply helping people to stay better informed. It has the sense of the breathless Brexit coverage we’ve endured over the last three-and-a-half years, where media outlets promised to help us follow “every twist and turn”. That does not feel an appropriate way to cover an illness that’s spreading around the globe.
Meanwhile the radio phone-in shows given over to discussion of the virus are heavy on opinion but light on fact. Often there is no medical expert in the studios to rebut the more outlandish claims, and it all just adds to the confusion.
Then there is the panic buying. Arguably this has been hyped up more by social media than traditional outlets, with people sharing images of empty supermarket shelves. I’ve long argued that social media platforms need to find a way to tackle fake news without resorting to censorship, and the spread of covid-19 only underlines that. And while, of course, newspapers and broadcast news bulletins are going to reflect the situation in our shops, and should do, they need to explain why panic buying is really not helping the situation. Panic buying creates panic buying, and responsible journalists and editors must be careful not to overhype such things.
Indeed, given the amount of misinformation and fake new swirling around online, it is incumbent on journalists to become a trusted resource. As well as the Sunday Times story highlighted earlier, among the rather frantic push alerts, both the BBC and Sky News have actually hosted informative discussions with experts. That’s important work and it should be welcome by us all.
The British public, and indeed people around the world, need real information in the face of the outbreak. Because when it comes to coronavirus, ignorance is not bliss.
