Search

The spread of accurate and inaccurate information happened quickly in the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic and understanding how this occurred is important to prepare for communication of future disease outbreaks. The purpose of this study was to understand Americans’ information seeking and sharing behaviors during the early stages of COVID-19 and was guided by the following objectives: identify passive sources/channels of information; identify active sources/channels of information; and describe how frequently and across which channels/sources the U.S. public shared information about COVID-19 in early stages of the pandemic. Results indicated people first found information about COVID-19 from personal communication but turned to national and international organizations if they were to actively seek information. Scientists and universities were some of the least sought after and shared sources of information. The sources shared most were from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the World Health Organization. Implications from this research are a need for communicators to use grassroots communication efforts during a crisis, to actively share information early during a crisis, to share information outside of traditional academic networks, and to collaborate with sources inside and outside of traditional Extension networks.

Disruptions from COVID-19 forced agricultural business owners to navigate the uncertainty of market disruptions with limited information. As an effect, the quality of information available for agricultural businesses to adapt to changes was a concern. The purpose of this study was to determine the availability and credibility of resources for agricultural businesses to make informed decisions about food markets during COVID-19. Source credibility was the guiding framework to achieve the research objectives of 1) Describe resources available related to impacts of COVID-19 on the food supply chain, 2) Determine the credibility of available resources. A quantitative content and textual analyses were employed. Results revealed 401 terms used to describe resources (n = 779). Eleven of the top 36 terms were used over 100 times. These were: farmer, resources, farm, market, business, local, health, safe, supply, agriculture, and chain. The majority of resources (66%, f = 514) were mid-level credible sources (industry/business organization, online/print news source, nonprofit), and 32.2% (f = 251) were of the highest credibility (university scientists, USDA scientist, Extension). Implications of this work show an opportunity for university and Extension systems to publish resources and serve as credible sources related to this particular crisis.

During the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic (March-April 2020), opinion leaders in agriculture and natural resources (ANR) were asked to participate in a survey about the impacts of the crisis on the ANR industry specifically about their concerns related to communication, economics, level of preparedness, and health during this crisis. Of the 225 ANR leaders who participated, the majority were concerned that members of the public were sharing inaccurate information about COVID-19; others they come into contact with were not taking appropriate measures to avoid contracting COVID-19; about the impact of COVID-19 on the U.S. economy, their state’s economy, and the global economy; and other countries’ level of preparedness to deal with COVID-19. ANR leaders were consistently the most concerned about items that were outside of their direct sphere of influence. Implications from this work are that ANR leadership programs should incorporate programing to help ANR leaders understand how to be influential during a crisis at a national and international level. For statewide ANR leadership programs, it is recommended to include programming sessions related to identifying and sharing credible information and enabling and inspiring those in their circle of influence to do the same.

Zoonotic disease epidemics are on the rise with emerging diseases being identified that affect humans and animals alike. An understanding about communication networks of those involved in managing a zoonotic disease outbreak is necessary to develop a strong communication response in the event of a zoonotic disease outbreak. The purpose of this study was to explore the communication networks of livestock producers, veterinarians, human health professionals, and emergency managers related to zoonotic disease. In-depth interviews were conducted with 41 people within key areas of one state in an effort to understand how communication networks may be activated during a crisis. This study revealed a wide range of information sources that livestock producers, medical professionals, veterinarians, and emergency managers seek information from. The results from this study also highlight the communication gaps, such as veterinarians not communicating with livestock producers, emergency managers not communicating with medical professionals and livestock producers, and a lack of communication between medical professionals and livestock producers. It is recommended that professionals who play a key role in zoonotic disease outbreaks, such as livestock producers, veterinarians, human health professionals, and emergency managers, cultivate and maintain relationships outside their usual professional group beyond times of disease outbreaks.

Zoonotic diseases are a significant threat to human and animal health with the effects of a widespread epidemic impacting agricultural producers and consumers alike. Online information sources have the opportunity to widely distribute information, but, with a topic as complex as zoonotic disease, information sharing should be managed carefully. Risk communication and prepared responses for zoonotic disease can help communicate messages effectively. This study looked at how two federal websites, CDC and USDA, were communicating about zoonotic disease. The quantitative content analysis methodology was guided by the research objectives of 1) determine availability of information related to zoonotic disease, 2) describe the zoonotic diseases, impacts, and messages 3) determine the use of prepared responses in articles related to zoonotic disease, and 4) determine connectivity with other online resources on zoonotic disease. Results indicate information is difficult to find on both websites, and there is a lack of connectivity with other online resources. Prepared responses were used to varying degrees. Implications and recommendations from this work are that agricultural communicators and those with influence over federal communication on zoonotic disease should actively integrate prepared responses in communication and seek opportunities to connect to a larger network of those working in zoonotic disease.