Newspaper coverage on solidarity and personal responsibility in the COVID-19 pandemic: A content analysis from Germany and German-speaking Switzerland

Zimmermann, Bettina; Buyx, Alena; McLennan, Stuart

doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2023.101388

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 59 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…These were perceived as more sustainable and efficient to support those in need than individual solidarity. Yet, policymakers in Germany repeatedly called for solidarity on an individual level and asked people to “show responsibility for each other” [ 49 , 50 ]. Our findings could also be understood as a reaction against such politicization of solidarity as a concept instead of practising it by implementing institutionalized forms of solidarity and reciprocity to mitigate perceived and existing inequalities.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Solidarity and reciprocity during the COVID-19 pandemic: a longitudinal qualitative interview study from Germany

Schönweitz,

Zimmermann,

Hangel

et al. 2024

BMC Public Health

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background While solidarity practices were important in mitigating the Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, their limits became evident as the pandemic progressed. Taking a longitudinal approach, this study analyses German residents’ changing perceptions of solidarity practices during the COVID-19 pandemic and examines potential reasons for these changes. Methods Adults living in Germany were interviewed in April 2020 (n = 46), October 2020 (n = 43) and October 2021 (n = 40) as part of the SolPan Research Commons, a large-scale, international, qualitative, longitudinal study uniquely situated in a major global public health crisis. Interviews were analysed using qualitative content analysis. Results While solidarity practices were prominently discussed and positively evaluated in April 2020, this initial enthusiasm waned in October 2020 and October 2021. Yet, participants still perceived solidarity as important for managing the pandemic and called for institutionalized forms of solidarity in October 2020 and October 2021. Reasons for these changing perceptions of solidarity included (i) increasing personal and societal costs to act in solidarity, (ii) COVID-19 policies hindering solidarity practices, and (iii) a perceived lack of reciprocity as participants felt that solidarity practices from the state were not matching their individual efforts. Conclusions Maintaining solidarity contributes to maximizing public health during a pandemic. Institutionalized forms of solidarity to support those most in need contribute to perceived reciprocity among individuals, which might increase their motivation to act in solidarity. Thus, rather than calling for individual solidarity during times of crisis, authorities should consider implementing sustaining solidarity-based social support systems that go beyond immediate crisis management.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%