Journal of Health Communication, 19:1213–1215, 2014 Copyright # Taylor & Francis Group, LLC ISSN: 1081-0730 print=1087-0415 online DOI: 10.1080/10810730.2014.977680
Editorial Ebola Crisis—Communication Chaos We Can Avoid SCOTT C. RATZAN AND KENNETH P. MORITSUGU Mirroring a Hollywood thriller movie, the Ebola outbreak is dramatically developing in real time, complete with alerts, warnings, and breaking news. Apocalyptic predictions from our trusted health organizations warn that the outbreak will last at least a year and infect more than a million people before it is controlled. Even as Americans are reassured by global organizations and our government that Ebola is confined to certain parts of West Africa, a seemingly normal traveler entered the United States and soon became sick with Ebola. This sparked a new panic with front page coverage relentlessly pursued on our nation’s network news, newspapers, and social media. This pattern of communication chaos tests our ability to appropriately reach and inform citizens with understandable, reliable, and actionable news (information) they can use. People wonder about their risk of exposure in daily life, whether it be in apartment complexes, airports, schools, supermarkets, or hospitals. Multiple spokespeople add their perspective that the United States has ‘‘pandemic preparedness’’ and reassure that we will beat the virus and win this battle. The public can look to President Obama or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Tom Frieden, or National Institutes of Health (NIH)= National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Burwell, and locally to their governors, mayors, and a host of other ‘‘experts’’ from universities and other organizations. Many statements assure Americans, yet there are some that call for banning travel from West Africa and some unnecessary measures, not in line with public health preparedness. As information and images from Africa pour in through media coverage, social media, blogs, and conversations, we are understandably concerned. We have seen our friendly newscasters showing us people lying dead in the streets in Liberia and telling us the story of hospitals refusing patients, schools closing, and children orphaned. President Obama has addressed this threat directly at the United Nations and has committed thousands of US troops to Liberia to beat the virus and protect people. Equally concerning is the response in the United States. A White House briefing on October 3, 2014 was meant to reassure the American public and ended with a
Scott C. Ratzan, MD, MPA, is Editor-in Chief, Journal of Health Communication: International Perspectives and Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. His books include The Mad Cow Crisis: Health and the Public Good and AIDS: Effective Health Communication for the 90s. Kenneth P. Moritsugu, MD, MPH, is an Adjunct Professor of Global Health at the George Washington University Milken Foundation School of Public Health and a retired Acting Surgeon General of the United States.
1213
1214
Editorial
final question on who bears ultimately responsibility for what happened in Texas. HHS Secretary Burwell stated: [This breakdown] is why we have to communicate, and communicate again, and communicate with clarity. And if there was anything that people [need]—that’s why there are a hundred different documents that have been put up on the CDC website, because we put up the document, we get the call if there’s a question. And if for some reason people don’t feel it’s clear or have an additional question, we get it up, we answer their question, but we’re trying to disseminate that information more broadly. (The White House Office of the Press Secretary, 2014). Secretary Burwell is right, communication is indeed the issue. Communication that works for policy makers and medical personnel, and is understood by them, may be very different from communication that works for the public. This is where we need to understand that one message does not fit all. Most Americans do not get their health information from the CDC website. They may not know that there’s no risk unless there is contact with bodily fluids of an infected and contagious patient with Ebola. Ebola is scary, but the messages to the American public need not be confusing; they need to be clear, science-based, and understandable. What we really need is a trusted source for both the public health community, and the public at large, that answers basic questions and updates us for how we engage. What do I need to know? What do I need to do or not do today to protect my health and that of my family? Where do I find information that I can understand and trust? People do not have to stay home, fearful if any fever, pain, or cough is the beginning of an Ebola infection. They also do not have to be afraid for their children in school, as even if a child was hugged by someone who had exposure to Ebola but did not have symptoms at the time, no one is at risk at the school or playground. Over a year ago, an editorial in this journal (Ratzan, 2013) warned of the perils of a pandemic on the horizon and suggested communication preparedness with an evidence-based approach. We have learned lessons from other threats—anthrax, Mad Cow Disease, H1N1, SARS, and HIV=AIDS. In the United States, a single trustworthy source—a role that the US Surgeon General once held and still has—would help the American public have an evidence-based, up-to-date, credible source from which they have the opportunity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services to make appropriate health decisions—a goal of health literacy. If we have this leadership, our state, county, city, and local health departments could also follow evidence-based approaches and not self-impose restrictions different from trustworthy and well-thought guidelines. Ebola—a virus once far away from US soil—is yet another warning that we need to establish communication preparedness. Additionally, to quell the Ebola scourge globally, we also need a response beyond boots on the ground. We need to strengthen our international institution communication response, arming government, medical, and community leaders with information and communication strategies that will help transform people’s behavior and beliefs about the disease. This will include visible demonstration of disease control procedures so that trusted village heads, imams, and traditional healers demonstrate health behaviors such as hand washing, human contact, and burial practices to control the spread of the disease. Such influential community and social mobilization is a challenge because communicating the public health and community benefits of disease control is in itself a communication challenge.
Editorial
1215
Our history documents that an informed, activated public is of utmost importance in protecting the health of the public. Likewise, an informed and activated leadership that employs health communication and diplomacy is fundamental to restoring Americans’ health while building and maintaining a strong public health system.
References Ratzan, S. C. (2013). ‘‘They say’’ the next big pandemic is near: Are we prepared? Journal of Health Communication, 18, 757–759. doi:10.1080=10810730.2013.809300. The White House Office of the Press Secretary. (2014). Press briefing on government response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa, October 3 [Press release]. Retrieved from http:// www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/10/03/press-briefing-government-responseebola-epidemic-west-africa-1032014
Copyright of Journal of Health Communication is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Editorial Ebola Crisis—Communication Chaos We Can Avoid SCOTT C. RATZAN AND KENNETH P. MORITSUGU Mirroring a Hollywood thriller movie, the Ebola outbreak is dramatically developing in real time, complete with alerts, warnings, and breaking news. Apocalyptic predictions from our trusted health organizations warn that the outbreak will last at least a year and infect more than a million people before it is controlled. Even as Americans are reassured by global organizations and our government that Ebola is confined to certain parts of West Africa, a seemingly normal traveler entered the United States and soon became sick with Ebola. This sparked a new panic with front page coverage relentlessly pursued on our nation’s network news, newspapers, and social media. This pattern of communication chaos tests our ability to appropriately reach and inform citizens with understandable, reliable, and actionable news (information) they can use. People wonder about their risk of exposure in daily life, whether it be in apartment complexes, airports, schools, supermarkets, or hospitals. Multiple spokespeople add their perspective that the United States has ‘‘pandemic preparedness’’ and reassure that we will beat the virus and win this battle. The public can look to President Obama or Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Director Tom Frieden, or National Institutes of Health (NIH)= National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Director Anthony Fauci, Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Sylvia Burwell, and locally to their governors, mayors, and a host of other ‘‘experts’’ from universities and other organizations. Many statements assure Americans, yet there are some that call for banning travel from West Africa and some unnecessary measures, not in line with public health preparedness. As information and images from Africa pour in through media coverage, social media, blogs, and conversations, we are understandably concerned. We have seen our friendly newscasters showing us people lying dead in the streets in Liberia and telling us the story of hospitals refusing patients, schools closing, and children orphaned. President Obama has addressed this threat directly at the United Nations and has committed thousands of US troops to Liberia to beat the virus and protect people. Equally concerning is the response in the United States. A White House briefing on October 3, 2014 was meant to reassure the American public and ended with a
Scott C. Ratzan, MD, MPA, is Editor-in Chief, Journal of Health Communication: International Perspectives and Adjunct Professor, Department of Sociomedical Sciences, Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health. His books include The Mad Cow Crisis: Health and the Public Good and AIDS: Effective Health Communication for the 90s. Kenneth P. Moritsugu, MD, MPH, is an Adjunct Professor of Global Health at the George Washington University Milken Foundation School of Public Health and a retired Acting Surgeon General of the United States.
1213
1214
Editorial
final question on who bears ultimately responsibility for what happened in Texas. HHS Secretary Burwell stated: [This breakdown] is why we have to communicate, and communicate again, and communicate with clarity. And if there was anything that people [need]—that’s why there are a hundred different documents that have been put up on the CDC website, because we put up the document, we get the call if there’s a question. And if for some reason people don’t feel it’s clear or have an additional question, we get it up, we answer their question, but we’re trying to disseminate that information more broadly. (The White House Office of the Press Secretary, 2014). Secretary Burwell is right, communication is indeed the issue. Communication that works for policy makers and medical personnel, and is understood by them, may be very different from communication that works for the public. This is where we need to understand that one message does not fit all. Most Americans do not get their health information from the CDC website. They may not know that there’s no risk unless there is contact with bodily fluids of an infected and contagious patient with Ebola. Ebola is scary, but the messages to the American public need not be confusing; they need to be clear, science-based, and understandable. What we really need is a trusted source for both the public health community, and the public at large, that answers basic questions and updates us for how we engage. What do I need to know? What do I need to do or not do today to protect my health and that of my family? Where do I find information that I can understand and trust? People do not have to stay home, fearful if any fever, pain, or cough is the beginning of an Ebola infection. They also do not have to be afraid for their children in school, as even if a child was hugged by someone who had exposure to Ebola but did not have symptoms at the time, no one is at risk at the school or playground. Over a year ago, an editorial in this journal (Ratzan, 2013) warned of the perils of a pandemic on the horizon and suggested communication preparedness with an evidence-based approach. We have learned lessons from other threats—anthrax, Mad Cow Disease, H1N1, SARS, and HIV=AIDS. In the United States, a single trustworthy source—a role that the US Surgeon General once held and still has—would help the American public have an evidence-based, up-to-date, credible source from which they have the opportunity to obtain, process, and understand basic health information and services to make appropriate health decisions—a goal of health literacy. If we have this leadership, our state, county, city, and local health departments could also follow evidence-based approaches and not self-impose restrictions different from trustworthy and well-thought guidelines. Ebola—a virus once far away from US soil—is yet another warning that we need to establish communication preparedness. Additionally, to quell the Ebola scourge globally, we also need a response beyond boots on the ground. We need to strengthen our international institution communication response, arming government, medical, and community leaders with information and communication strategies that will help transform people’s behavior and beliefs about the disease. This will include visible demonstration of disease control procedures so that trusted village heads, imams, and traditional healers demonstrate health behaviors such as hand washing, human contact, and burial practices to control the spread of the disease. Such influential community and social mobilization is a challenge because communicating the public health and community benefits of disease control is in itself a communication challenge.
Editorial
1215
Our history documents that an informed, activated public is of utmost importance in protecting the health of the public. Likewise, an informed and activated leadership that employs health communication and diplomacy is fundamental to restoring Americans’ health while building and maintaining a strong public health system.
References Ratzan, S. C. (2013). ‘‘They say’’ the next big pandemic is near: Are we prepared? Journal of Health Communication, 18, 757–759. doi:10.1080=10810730.2013.809300. The White House Office of the Press Secretary. (2014). Press briefing on government response to the Ebola epidemic in West Africa, October 3 [Press release]. Retrieved from http:// www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2014/10/03/press-briefing-government-responseebola-epidemic-west-africa-1032014
Copyright of Journal of Health Communication is the property of Routledge and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
