What is it about?
During the COVID-19 pandemic, many news outlets encouraged vaccination. This study looks at how online news in Cyprus discussed vaccination and how these media narratives may have interacted with vaccine hesitancy. Using an intertextual approach (how texts reuse and combine other voices and sources) and focusing on polyphony (multiple voices in one narrative), we analysed how vaccination was presented as the route to a “return to normality.” The coverage was largely pro-vaccination, but it often privileged elite voices, especially scientific experts and politicians, more than citizens’ perspectives. This hierarchical voice structure can unintentionally undermine trust, especially among groups already sceptical of institutions. We also show how media used pre-legitimation processes: presenting vaccination as the necessary answer to feared future crises, while depicting unvaccinated people as a threat to society. These narratives aligned with technocratic discourse emphasising expertise while sidelining ordinary people’s positioning. In addition, rhetorical contradictions (for example, mixing scientific authority with religious appeals) may have added confusion rather than clarity.
Featured Image
Photo by DJ Paine on Unsplash
Why is it important?
Because public health messaging succeeds not only through “more information,” but through credible, inclusive communication. This study shows how pro-vaccine discourse can still create distance and distrust if it repeatedly centres elites and marginalises citizen perspectives
Perspectives
What surprised me most was that pro-vaccine discourse can still reproduce the conditions that fuel hesitancy. In the material I analysed, vaccination was repeatedly framed as the route to a “return to normality,” and this was often supported through authoritative, elite voices such as scientists, doctors, politicians. This is understandable in a crisis, but it also creates a sense that the public is being instructed rather than invited into a shared conversation. I also noticed how quickly moral boundaries were drawn around the “responsible” vaccinated citizen versus the “irresponsible” unvaccinated person. My perspective is that these moral framings may feel satisfying in the short term, but they can deepen polarisation and make people dig in. For me, the key takeaway is that effective crisis communication is not only about being right; it’s about being credible and inclusive in how you construct public meaning.
Dimitris Trimithiotis
University of Cyprus
Read the Original
This page is a summary of: When pro-vaccine media discourses meet vaccine hesitancy, Journal of Language and Politics, April 2025, John Benjamins,
DOI: 10.1075/jlp.24054.tri.
You can read the full text:
Contributors
The following have contributed to this page
