Search

This article investigates pro-vax discourse during the COVID-19 pandemic. Expert and political discussions about the pandemic are abundant, commonly focusing on anti-vax and science-skeptic politics and further connecting them with post-truth and populism. However, research on pro-vax discourse remains largely overlooked. The article focuses on the case of Cyprus which received little scholarly attention in the context of the pandemic, especially by political science and media and communication scholarship. Applying discourse analysis to 120 media units that connect the articulations of scientific experts, politicians and journalists, empirical findings show that the discursive management of the pandemic takes place in the name of science, reason and responsibility, with key mechanisms of persuasion being the moralistic and fear-mongering narratives that place the responsibility for the return to normality on individual citizens. This highlights that communication about COVID-19 is not merely about healthcare and science. Rather, it is politicized and disciplinary in nature. The examination of the case of Cyprus alongside existing theories and debates reveals the internationally salient character of discursive features and patterns including the hegemony of techno-scientific objectivism, epistemological elitism and anti-populism. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article investigates how 'populism' was used in public discussions during the COVID-19 outbreak. It argues that the indiscriminate use of 'populism' and its association with the pandemic is rooted in the negative way it is talked about in public debates. Critically evaluating pundit claims framing populism as an 'anti-scientific', 'irresponsible' and 'authoritarian' response to the health crisis, this article shows that 'populism' does not suffice to explain actors' responses to COVID-19. Rather, populists' ideological positions played a crucial role in their pandemic politics. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]