Orr Daniela, Baram-Tsabari Ayelet, Landsman Keren
Faculty of Education in Science and Technology, Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel.
Department of Community Medicine and Epidemiology, Carmel Medical Center, Haifa, Israel.
Isr J Health Policy Res. 2016 Nov 10;5:34. doi: 10.1186/s13584-016-0093-4. eCollection 2016.
Social media can act as an important platform for debating, discussing, and disseminating information about vaccines. Our objectives were to map and describe the roles played by web-based mainstream media and social media as platforms for vaccination-related public debates and discussions during the Polio crisis in Israel in 2013: where and how did the public debate and discuss the issue, and how can these debates and discussions be characterized?
Polio-related coverage was collected from May 28 to October 31, 2013, from seven online Hebrew media platforms and the Facebook groups discussing the Polio vaccination were mapped and described. In addition, 2,289 items from the Facebook group "Parents talk about Polio vaccination" were analyzed for socio-demographic and thematic characteristics.
The traditional media mainly echoed formal voices from the Ministry of Health. The comments on the Facebook vaccination opposition groups could be divided into four groups: comments with individualistic perceptions, comments that expressed concerns about the safety of the OPV, comments that expressed distrust in the Ministry of Health, and comments denying Polio as a disease. In the Facebook group "Parents talk about the Polio vaccination", an active group with various participants, 321 commentators submitted 2289 comments, with 64 % of the comments written by women. Most (92 %) people involved were parents. The comments were both personal (referring to specific situations) and general in nature (referring to symptoms or wide implications). A few (13 %) of the commentators were physicians ( = 44), who were responsible for 909 (40 %) of the items in the sample. Half the doctors and 6 % of the non-doctors wrote over 10 items each. This Facebook group formed a unique platform where unmediated debates and discussions between the public and medical experts took place.
The comments on the social media, as well as the socio-demographic profiles of the commentators, suggest that social media is an active and versatile debate and discussion-facilitating platform in the context of vaccinations. This paper presents public voices, which should be seen as authentic (i.e. unmediated by the media or other political actors) and useful for policy making purposes. The policy implications include identifying social media as a main channel of communication during health crises, and acknowledging the voices heard on social media as authentic and useful for policy making. Human and financial resources need to be devolved specifically to social media. Health officials and experts need to be accessible on social media, and be equipped to readily provide the information, support and advice the public is looking for.
社交媒体可成为辩论、讨论和传播疫苗相关信息的重要平台。我们的目标是梳理并描述基于网络的主流媒体和社交媒体在2013年以色列脊髓灰质炎危机期间作为疫苗接种相关公众辩论和讨论平台所发挥的作用:公众在哪里以及如何辩论和讨论该问题,以及这些辩论和讨论具有怎样的特点?
收集了2013年5月28日至10月31日期间来自七个希伯来语在线媒体平台的脊髓灰质炎相关报道,并对讨论脊髓灰质炎疫苗接种的脸书群组进行了梳理和描述。此外,还对脸书群组“家长谈脊髓灰质炎疫苗接种”中的2289条内容进行了社会人口统计学和主题特征分析。
传统媒体主要传达卫生部的官方声音。脸书疫苗接种反对群组中的评论可分为四类:具有个人观点的评论、表达对口服脊髓灰质炎疫苗安全性担忧的评论、表达对卫生部不信任的评论以及否认脊髓灰质炎是一种疾病的评论。在脸书群组“家长谈脊髓灰质炎疫苗接种”中,这是一个有各类参与者的活跃群组,321名评论者提交了2289条评论,其中64%的评论由女性撰写。大多数(92%)参与的人是家长。评论既有个人性质的(涉及具体情况),也有一般性的(涉及症状或广泛影响)。少数(13%)评论者是医生(共44人),他们撰写了样本中909条(40%)内容。一半的医生和6%的非医生每人撰写了超过10条内容。这个脸书群组形成了一个独特的平台,公众和医学专家在此进行了直接的辩论和讨论。
社交媒体上的评论以及评论者的社会人口统计学特征表明,社交媒体在疫苗接种背景下是一个活跃且多功能的促进辩论和讨论的平台。本文呈现了公众的声音,应将其视为真实的(即未经过媒体或其他政治行为体的中介)且对政策制定有用。政策影响包括将社交媒体确定为健康危机期间的主要沟通渠道,并承认在社交媒体上听到的声音是真实的且对政策制定有用。人力和财力资源需要专门下放给社交媒体。卫生官员和专家需要在社交媒体上易于联系,并准备好随时提供公众正在寻找的信息、支持和建议。