Search

Risk identification has been at the heart of media coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Less consideration has been paid to the way that the media itself has (re)produced these risk categories, and how this has changed over the course of the pandemic. The aim of this article is to understand how risk has been constructed in the Aotearoa, New Zealand news media over the course of the COVID-19 pandemic. This paper reports findings from a longitudinal media analysis of mainstream news media articles (n = 388) published in the first week of March 2020, March 2021 and March 2022. Underpinned by a socio-cultural theoretical understanding of risk, we conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of the 22 most relevant articles from a week of coverage during each month of March. Our analysis identified three key themes by which we characterise the discussions of risk as these developed from 2020 to 2022: (1) Subjects of risk; (2) Spaces of risk; and (3) The nation facing risk. We conclude that the dominant frame surrounding risk was one of mutual risk and solidarity. We suggest future policies around pandemic risk mitigation must attend to both the range of competing risks as well as the different epistemologies (including scientific and indigenous worldviews) informing risk. We suggest that researchers, policy makers and reporters involve the voices of those 'at risk' into their publications. This analysis shows the value of taking a sociocultural analysis of risk as it is framed within a particular national-cultural context. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

During the COVID-19 pandemic, older people were identified as requiring additional support and protection. This multi-method qualitative study shifts this narrative by asking: how did older people contribute to the COVID-19 public health response? We conducted a reflexive thematic analysis of responses from 870 letter-writers and 44 interviewees who were older people living in Aotearoa, New Zealand during the COVID-19 pandemic. Older people made substantial contributions during the COVID-19 pandemic through: 1) volunteering; 2) nurturing; and 3) advocacy/activism. We argue that policy makers should take seriously the ways older people were providers of help and support in this period. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]