Covid-19 Pandemic Coping Strategies in a Complex Landscape of Crisis Communication: A Participatory Study with Disability Organisations in Sweden

Abstract

The article challenges the notion that crisis communication is a matter of outreach of a single message communicated as “one voice” from official channels speaking to the public about how to prepare for and manage crisis situations. The Covid-19 pandemic has made it evident that the general public is accessing multiple channels for crisis information while the crisis situation, the rules and knowledge are constantly changing. An array of different voices, facts, (fake) news and recommendations are channeled via public service, social media, national and international media. Most of this content is accessed and shared via digital channels, but also via communities, workplaces, and between friends and families living in the same country or abroad. This article presents insights gained from a qualitative study addressing disabled people whose everyday lives have always been characterized by extraordinary circumstances, and continuously so also during the Covid-19 pandemic. The aim was to create an understanding of disabled people’s crisis-specific media practices and their ways of coping with situations caused by the pandemic. Through a national online survey study and workshops, it explores how disabled people experience the pandemic, and how crisis information flows affect trust between authorities and the disability movements. The study should be read in the light of the Swedish Covid-19 strategy, which put a strong emphasis on the individual’s responsibility and that every citizen is expected to follow the recommendations and take precautionary measures to limit the spread of the virus. This approach requires that both public agencies and citizens are capable of navigating the emerging complex crisis communication landscape and requires them to make responsible decisions and take relevant measures.

Design opportunities for future development of crisis communication technologies for marginalised groups – Co-designing with Swedish disability organisations

“…People have been faced with locked down societies, strained health care and all sorts of measures to mitigate the virus from spreading. Besides these direct effects, the pandemic situation has also revealed gaps in general crisis preparedness and weaknesses, which ought to be addressed to ensure that (Information about the we are better prepared for future crises, whatever they might entail (Eriksson et al, 2021;Lund€ alv et al, 2022). To achieve crisis preparedness, it is important that all people are included and involved and that crisis communication is designed in such a way that everyone can interpret it and understand how to adapt the rules and recommendations to their life situations.…”

“…The research project presented in this paper, aims to explore and co-design communication methods and technologies for supporting crisis preparedness (Eriksson et al, 2021;Lund€ alv et al, 2022). The focus is on marginalised groups and people with disabilities not included in the normative assumptions of general crisis communication (Coombs and Holladay, 2012).…”

“…Prior to the co-design workshop, focus group interviews, a national online survey and a preparatory workshop with crisis communicators were conducted (Eriksson et al, 2021;Lund€ alv et al, 2022). The results of these interventions revealed a complex crisis communication landscape.…”

“…Trust in governance risks diminishing and it can become challenging to find reliable information. This makes responding to a crisis challenging and especially for those who in their social life make use of various institutional support functions and who are not included in the normative assumptions of general crisis communication, such as people with disabilities (Lund€ alv et al, 2022;Lyngb€ ack et al, 2020).…”

“…Besides these direct effects, the pandemic situation has also revealed gaps in general crisis preparedness and weaknesses, which ought to be addressed to ensure that we are better prepared for future crises, whatever they might entail (Eriksson et al. , 2021; Lundälv et al. , 2022).…”