They are starting to come out many books on the pandemic. The initial caution of publishers to embark on the publication of books on such a traumatic, and in some ways mysterious, phenomenon is starting to give way to a greater commitment to put ideas, reflections, analyses, surveys, research into circulation that can help shed light on this phenomenon that hit our lives like a meteorite.
Also Amazon's initial stance not to make too much promotional space for books on Covid-19 to avoid contributing to the communicative confusion deriving from the diffusion, in the form of books (an instrument that undoubtedly has a specific weight different from a Facebook post), of approximate if not openly tendentious is losing weight.
The Seattle giant seems less worried today and is rightly starting to open its promotional channels to productions on the Covid-19.
Pandemic and communication
The cover of the recent book published by Guerini e Associati (with goWare for the digital edition) where two media professionals such as Lelio Alfonso and Gianluca Comin gather their reflections on one of the most strategic aspects of managing the pandemic crisis: communication.
In fact, there was quite a bit of communication chaos in the hectic days of the spread of the infection to the point that a neologism was born: infodemic, the new communication disease of the AD era (after Coronavirus).
Two expert scholars, but also professionals, of media and communication are dealing with it seriously and in a documented way.
Lelio Alfonso and Gianluca Comin, have published (with Guerini e Associati and goWare for the digital version) a book whose title is already a program #REDZONE. The Covid-19 between infodemic and communication.
We have verified how much communication is a strategic factor in managing the pandemic and the analysis conducted in this book can help institutional and emergency communication to develop the correct forms and tools to make it up to the enormous challenge that these extreme forms of crisis launch to society as a whole.
Here is an excerpt from the book
Italy and the Civil Protection: towards "communicative protection"
The daily bulletin of the National Civil Protection, broadcast live on television at 18 pm, thus putting the media and citizens on the same level, proved, at least initially, to be the widespread antidote to the invention of news that bounced around the net, rekindling a social tribalism. Compared to the anxiety-producing and highly emotional climate of television and digital instantaneousness, listening to the bulletin has become for many the real appointment that marked the forced stay at home.
Apart from a few days of forced absence due to feverish symptoms, citizens were accompanied during this emergency by the voice of the head of the Civil Protection, Angelo Borrelli, flanked by a small number of managers from the Istituto Superiore di Sanità , of the Ministry and other experts in turn, called to answer questions from the journalists present as well as to provide specific elements of information on the various fronts of fight against the epidemic.
A service that has allowed the citizen to have a clear picture of the daily situation, no doubt, but also in this case not without contraindications, to paraphrase medical terminology. […] Unfortunately not infrequently the data offered appeared decontextualized and unclear. First of all, in the bulletin the deaths from the coronavirus or with the coronavirus are not distinguished and this has created many doubts.
The communication of data was not very efficient, as Francesco Giorgino underlined several times, for three fundamental reasons: during the press conferences there were no date interpreters and the videographics; the right proportion of data has not been provided, given that rates and percentages are much more important than other indicators in understanding what is happening; and finally, the sequence in which they were communicated was essentially wrong.
Instead of proceeding with the number of infected, deceased and recovered, it would have been much more intuitive and functional to communicate the new infected, then the recovered and finally the number of deceased for the day. However, the role of the Civil Protection has also changed as Phase 2 approaches. Press conferences have decreased in frequency and the "tone" has faded, as had happened for the institutions.
All of this until the decision, on April 30, to suspend the appointment. An intentional and functional exit from the scene to return to normal?
Building a new information society
Creating a new information society means allowing a mature society to develop a conscious critical sense, capable of discerning the right information and using social media judiciously. In a nutshell, it is about providing a kind of policy that helps citizens live in the virtual world. In fact, although the multiplicity of information channels has ensured a differentiation of thought, this has too often favored the emergence of fake news.
The declaration of a pandemic, differently from what is perceived by many Italians, is a testimony to the geographical spread, not to the seriousness of the disease, and it is precisely the viral nature of the information that is responsible for social behavior in recent months. In order to create a pandemic-proof information society, it is essential, first of all, to educate it in language, remembering the differentiation between scientific, institutional and viral language.
Unfortunately, a big obstacle is access to information. Can we say that information has been free during this pandemic? […] If it is true that many newspapers have reduced the price of subscriptions and many experts and professionals have made their knowledge available to people for free, it is also true that many of the studies in specialized journals have always been subjected to paywalls. How is it possible, therefore, to build an information society in an emergency if this is paid for?
It would mean creating a non-homogeneous society and the competent authorities and subjects, pro futureshould reflect on this aspect and, should it not be possible to make accessible to all the most important studies relating to the current emergency, provide for alternative information systems capable of reaching all sections of the population.
As Mario Draghi wrote, former president of the European Central Bank, in a long article on Financial Times published at the end of March, there is a need to take immediate, clear and concrete actions. In his speech, Draghi explained with sincerity and simplicity what could present itself as the post-Covid-19 economic scenario. Thanks to his frank and incisive words, it was possible for all citizens to easily acquire information relating to public debt levels and future economic scenarios.
Therefore, his communication strategy is worthy of note, an example for all the actors involved in the emergency. [...] That's right, in redefining the new information society it is important to educate the use of institutional sites and enhance
experts recognized as primary source. Finally, these must be able to communicate, as in this case, in a straightforward, fast and understandable manner to citizens.
What will become of us? Open questions and future prospects
If, as demonstrated by the now historic report conducted by researchers at Imperial College London, the fight against Covid-19 will last, in the best case scenario, the time to find a vaccine, therefore approximately a year and a half, the questions relating to future prospects will multiply and become increasingly complex.
Our habits have been turned upside down in every field, from education to sentimental life, from the possibility of making a career to seeing one's loved ones, and the human, economic and psychological implications and costs are difficult to quantify.
For this it is necessary for institutions and companies to start think, cooperatively, of a strategy of unlock. This strategy had to be worked out at the same time of the period of lockdown. The exit from the Covid-19 emergency, as well as from any other situation of an exceptional nature, must be carefully studied, planned and calibrated. Not only for the economic impacts, but for the psychological effects that the new opening will have on each of us. Lunar scenarios that are now part of our daily lives: limitation of freedom of movement, masks integral parts of our clothing, deaths in prisons, halved pollution, layoffs for thousands of workers.
What will happen next? Will it be so easy to get back to normal? The lucky ones spent the quarantine with their loved ones. Instead, let us think of all those who have had families, boyfriends and friends far from their place of imprisonment. What will become of them? Will we witness a new exodus? And how much impact will this free exit have on the labor market? Frustrated and forced into one smart working pressing and interminable, will the workers who have been lucky enough not to see their careers interrupted seek refreshment in some happy island?
We will certainly find ourselves faced with a disrupted world, in which webinars will take the place of conferences and handshakes will be replaced by a trill for access to a web platform. Yet, there are also those who see an opportunity in the extent of this upheaval, and are investing time, resources and money in these new relationship systems.
Therefore, in what we could really define Phase 2, that of slow and conscious exit from a situation of such a high level of complexity, we are all called into question: it is necessary to rethink our lives, our way of managing interpersonal and work relationships. We are all called to make an effort to rethink our way of life and this must necessarily start from the way we communicate.
