Concerns Around Opposition to the Green Pass in Italy: Social Listening Analysis by Using a Mixed Methods Approach

Abstract

Background The recent introduction of COVID-19 certificates in several countries, including the introduction of the European green pass, has been met with protests and concerns by a fraction of the population. In Italy, the green pass has been used as a nudging measure to incentivize vaccinations because a valid green pass is needed to enter restaurants, bars, museums, or stadiums. As of December 2021, a valid green pass can be obtained by being fully vaccinated with an approved vaccine, recovered from COVID-19, or tested. However, a green pass obtained with a test has a short validity (48 hours for the rapid test, 72 hours for the polymerase chain reaction test) and does not allow access to several indoor public places. Objective This study aims to understand and describe the concerns of individuals opposed to the green pass in Italy, the main arguments of their discussions, and their characterization. Methods We collected data from Telegram chats and analyzed the arguments and concerns that were raised by the users by using a mixed methods approach. Results Most individuals opposing the green pass share antivaccine views, but doubts and concerns about vaccines are generally not among the arguments raised to oppose the green pass. Instead, the discussion revolves around the legal aspects and the definition of personal freedom. We explain the differences and similarities between antivaccine and anti–green pass discourses, and we discuss the ethical ramifications of our research, focusing on the use of Telegram chats as a social listening tool for public health. Conclusions A large portion of individuals opposed to the green pass share antivaccine views. We suggest public health and political institutions to provide a legal explanation and a context for the use of the green pass, as well as to continue focusing on vaccine communication to inform vaccine-hesitant individuals. Further work is needed to define a consensual ethical framework for social listening for public health.

Public views on the Covid‐19 immunity certificate: A scoping review

“…Most studies were conducted in the United Kingdom and Switzerland—respectively, four 8 , 17 , 20 , 27 and three 18 , 25 , 26 —and the remaining were from Israel, 27 , 28 Italy, 12 , 19 Spain, 16 , 20 Australia, 15 , 20 Japan, 20 Taiwan, 20 Germany, 20 United States of America and 22 China. 23 , 29 Only one study did not report the country of data collection because it was conducted on Twitter.…”

“…All included studies involved a population of adults outside of healthcare settings. The majority of studies involved the general population, 8 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 25 , 26 , 27 , 28 one study involved a sample of international scholars, 15 one study involved older adults, 19 one study involved university students attending no Covid‐19 immunity certificate Telegram chat 12 and one study involved vaccine‐hesitant people. 29 Just one study sampled 512 tweets that originated from personal accounts, followed by media organizations, media‐related personalities, politicians and the travel industry.…”

“…Immunity certification seems to raise some ethical aimed societal concerns. Evidence from different studies showed how some individuals are opposing this proposal from an ethical perspective, considering potential problems, such as the risk of discrimination, 15 , 18 violation of liberties, 12 , 18 falsification 18 and infringed data privacy, 18 , 24 , 25 limited freedom of movement 17 and negative impact on behaviours. 25…”

“… 8 Moreover, how immunity passports can benefit oneself in terms of desiring a passport and being willing to infect oneself to gain an immunity certificate were all factors positively predictive of passport support. 20 Furthermore, some studies found that personal beliefs about vaccines and vaccination status may be a major predictor of acceptance of the immunity certificate: In particular, being favourable towards getting the Covid‐19 vaccination 12 , 23 , 28 , 29 and being vaccinated 19 , 26 , 28 , 29 are predictors of the Covid‐19 immunity certificate acceptance. Moreover, few studies revealed that concerns towards Covid‐19, in terms of higher susceptibility and risk perception, 8 , 20 are both related to a positive judgement of the immunity certification.…”

Perceived Covid-19-crisis intensity and family supportive organizational perceptions as antecedents of parental burnout: A study conducted in Italy in March/April 2021 and 2022

“…Measures in the spring of 2021 were very strict (schools were closed, leaving one’s house only allowed with authorization) and still strict in the spring of 2022, although at the end of March 2022 restriction measures were gradually loosened and more mobility was allowed for the vaccinated and when waring mouth-nose-masks ( Mazzuca, 2022 ). Protests against compulsory vaccination and restriction measures in Italian society increased during this timeframe, resulting in a substantial polarization in Italian society ( Bondielli et al, 2022 ; Spitale et al, 2022 ). This polarization has left no family untouched.…”