Covering a Pandemic: Critical Media Analysis Essay

An Overview of Media Analysis History and its Relevance

Modern technologies that spawned the culture of virtual spaces, remote communication, and social media also form a new type of world perception. In this new manner of seeing, the medium of communication or the media intermediary determines the meaning and direction of the transmitted information (Alvermann and Hagood, 2000). A lot of work over the past decades has been devoted to the study of media analysis, which has led to the formation of a new area of knowledge, concepts, and categories. The domain of media analysis may be considered a relatively new repercussion of the processes mentioned above, which makes the impulse to investigate this field inevitable (Alvermann and Hagood, 2000). As information is often associated with power and media is a contemporary quintessence of information or its absence, deconstructing media content has become a battlefield for the right to know. The essay strives to analyse the overarching significance of media analysis and its particular role in investigating how the pandemic is covered in news outlets.

In the occidental culture, the affirmation of postmodernist interpretation of truth has activated a new era for media. This interpretation on the surface allows each individual to have their realities and denies the existence of the universal one (Sim, 2019). Common nowadays perception of life as a game, the call to abandon the search for meaning, and put own opinions above evidence contributed to the modern state of media and the acute need for media analysis (Sim, 2019). Some researchers view this field as a branch of Critical Theory, an area of knowledge aimed at identifying the methods in which media content is used to affect the power balance in society (Deutscher and Lafont, 2017). Even though the extensive development of the field began rather recently, its first manifestations can be traced to the middle of the nineteenth century, when the first media monitoring canter was founded in London by a newsagent named Romeike (Kaulback, 2016). The further growth of media analysis manifested itself in the transition from individual analysts to agencies, corporations, and governments who also perform the media analysis nowadays (Kaulback, 2016).

Defying media analysis is crucial to ensure the unity of understanding of the issue. General opinions regarding the interpretation of what media analysis means seem somewhat equivalent and conforming. From this perspective, media analysis may be defined as a critical examination of the content, form, and context of a piece of media (Berger, 2017, p 311). Another definition states that critical media analysis means thinking critically about the impact of media on the distribution of power in society, nature and agendas of media powers and social knowledge (Stocchetti and Kukkonen, 2011). “Media” in these definitions refers to both the form and content which it communicates. After overviewing several definitions, the key elements present in them all are inspection, content, and effects produced. The main difference found between the definitions is their precision and the number of components included in them. In this way, it may be stated that certain unanimity is present in the way in which media analysis is defined.

The importance of media analysis may appear evident as it is somewhat understandable that it is aimed at revealing the strategies and tools intended to manipulate public opinion and, thus influence the socio-political situation in a country. According to Hua et al., (2018), media analysis is one of the constituents of the broader notion of media literacy, which in the contemporary world, is an essential competency for content consumers. It appears common for researchers to underline the value of media literacy which is partially sustained by media analysis not only for the professionals in the sphere but also for the general audience (Van Deursen, 2017). Hua et al. (2018, p. 371) state that “as an audience, it is not complete acceptance of information, but a process of “processing” information, from selective acceptance to information judgment to information adoption and information dissemination”. Hence, media analysis and media literacy are two interrelated processes, where the first one leads to the acquisition of the second. The practice of critical evaluation of media by the general public is an outcome that showcases the importance of media analysis.

The media’s toolkit that it uses to form public opinions is not overwhelmingly extensive and consists mainly of strategies that emerged in ancient rhetoric – framing is one of these techniques (Potapenko, 2016). It strives to stimulate specific interpretations and dim others through the usage of “frames”, which consist of rhetoric elements and specific vocabulary choices (Berger, 2017, p. 211). Recognising framing is an essential skill since the technique is often used to influence the public’s policy priorities. Fridkin et al. demonstrate the value of media analysis by investigating how the method is applied in depicting race and police brutality. The researchers (2017, p. 3399) emphasise that “two‑thirds of Facebook users (66%) and almost six of 10 Twitter users (59%) get some news from these cites”. In this way, media shapes the public’s attitude, who tend to receive information from social networks, towards a variety of issues making its analysis for a number of researchers a way to uncover and thus challenge social injustice.

The power that media professionals possess in the social construction of reality leads to a responsibility that could potentially be overlooked. The perceived authority of a media outlet in a society reflects the value of knowledge and the importance of its representation in a specific piece of media (Stocchetti and Kukkonen, 2011). Thus, it is argued that media in this age of information becomes a form of human existence, a moderator of perception, and thinking (Berger, 2017, p. 17). The importance of media analysis stems from the position it occupies in contemporary cultures.

Social media have become new agents of influence for the modern audience, with significant potential. The informative content of social media appears to be a unique form of unregulated, spontaneous and, in some way, amateur (moderated by the activity of Internet users themselves) information flow, and therefore examining this activity is a diagnostic of public opinion on significant aspects of public reality (Berger, 2017, p. 106). In this way, the stance among researchers investigating this area on the level and nature of the importance of media analysis is unanimous in underlining the role that it carries in assisting in reality construction and enhancing media literacy, and conscientiousness.

The role of social media in society, what degree of neutrality it should strive to obtain, and what political and societal systems should be supported by it are the questions that preoccupy media researchers. Stocchetti and Kukkonen (2011, p. 122) argue that “the critical enquiry into this deeper dimension of media power – that of constructing reality – is difficult because conceptual tools for this analysis, for example, the concept of power itself, are part of this construction”. Critical media analysis can create the conditions for the formation of a safe cultural space in which the general information order will be determined concerning the balance of interests of the individuals and society. Media analysis professionals should be able to exercise their information rights and freedoms.

“We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” Critical Analysis

“We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” by Liam Mannix is an example of how media shapes our perception of global politics, which can be demonstrated by the application of discourse analysis and framing. The approach aims to analyse mainly the statements made within the institutional framework and endowed with a historical, social, intellectual connotation, for instance, texts are studied taking into account the conditions of their formation and extralinguistic factors (Berger, 2017, p. 295). The general methodological principle of the approach lies in its interdisciplinarity (Berger, 2017, p. 296). Discourse analysis represents a critical attitude to knowledge about the world, examining the relationship between learning, social processes, and social behaviour. The method may help to determine the conditionality of how the issue of vaccine funding is presented in the article within the current socio‑political context. Taking into consideration the heated debates that unravelled around the topic, and the political implications that taking a stance entails, the delivery of ideas in the article could reveal a specific media bias.

The presenting bias in “We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” is somewhat noticeable, as the coverage in the article is slanted in favour of Professor Petrovsky, a scientist involved in vaccine development. The report covers an accident that took place in 2010 since the vaccine that was developed at that time could potentially serve as a basis for a new vaccine that could help in the prevention of COVID-19 spreading. The story is almost entirely presented from the point of view of the medical personnel, who testifies against a US government agency that reduced Australian laboratory funding (Mannix, 2020). The lack of commentaries from the opposing side of the clash is reasoned by the agency not responding to requests for comments. The incorporation of multiple sides of a conflict or varying and even opposing views on a problem is an integral factor that contributes to comprehensive and sophisticated media coverage. The article revolves mainly around one perspective, and it is understandable as the author chooses the perspective with which it is easier for the audience to empathise.

The presenting bias can be linked to mainstream bias, which is expressed by the tendency to adhere to the general direction in media coverage and avoid the inclusion of controversial topics or opinions into the news corpus. Elejalde, Ferres, and Herder (2018, p. 28) highlight that “for individuals as well as for society as a whole it is important to recognise and understand media bias that is shaped through underlying general political or socio-economic orientations”. Thus, uncovering biases in media, especially in times of a pandemic, which became an unavoidable topic for media outlets, may be not straightforward. “We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” covers a question that seems omnipresent and to state that the article suffers from mainstream bias solely on this ground is unfair. It may be noted that the text suffers from mainstream bias, because of the angle from which it covers the topic. The author seems to take a widely accepted stance, and points of view that could be considered out of favour are absent from the report.

Certain parts of “We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” focus on what could happen rather than on what is happening. For instance, Professor Petrovsky (2020, para. 10) claims that “if these vaccine trials had gone ahead – and they looked good – we would have felt in much better shape now”. This proneness to concentrate on what might occur given certain conditions signals the presence of speculative content bias. It should be noted that the source of the bias is not the author, but the interviewees. However, the author (2020, para. 2) introduces his article by stating, that “had those trials gone ahead in 2010, a vaccine for the deadly pandemic might be available right now “. Vigorous discussions around the pandemic make specific speculative topics look tempting – these circumstances enhance the value of journalistic integrity and standards.

The author of the article, Liam Mannix, is The Age and Sydney Morning Herald’s science reporter, who has been following the deployment of the pandemic since its beginning and concentrated thematically on the field before that. The author’s experience in covering similar issues renders him an adequate candidate to report on vaccine development. Even though the situation presented by Mannix is displeasing, the general COVID-19 vaccine development landscape seems extensive and spread across and funded by numerous courtiers (Lurie et al., 2020). It is claimed that the effort in response to the pandemic is unprecedented in terms of scale and speed (Tung et al., 2020). Presenting ideas transparently and straightforwardly is one of the principal characteristics of unbiased media and is a competence that professionals gain through practice. Despite the desired objectiveness and perceived professionalism, it is not uncommon for an article to concentrate exclusively on specific ideas, trying to sell them. As the article under consideration seems to revolve around one point of view, its message could be considered by some political one; the opinion on the topic is pre-made rather than evolved in the process.

The way the story in “We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” is told drives the reader to identify with the professionals interviewed, since the reader’s interest is directly engaged. The problem the article undertakes to cover enhances the sense of complicity and emotional involvement between the audience, the journalist, and the interviewee forming a sort of coalition against a distinct third party. The perspective of the people attached to the fund cutting seems to be excluded not deliberately but as a result of their unwillingness to comment. The viewpoint of the US National Institutes of Health, who provided Professor Petrovsky with funding in 2004, is indispensable to form an overarching vision (Mannix, 2020). As a result of the absence of multiple perspectives, the depiction of the events in the article may be considered fragmentary. The objectiveness of the report could be enhanced by the inclusion of alternate points of view.

The use of emotive language in news coverage, particularly, in regards to sensitive and heated topics, the category to which the COVID-19 pandemic belongs, is a method aimed to make readers react emotionally. The vocabulary choices present in “We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut)” are principally neutral with a few exceptions that can be found in the speech of the interviewees. The text is constructed on the testimonies given by several researchers who underwent funding cuts and the author’s remarks that provide context and direct the flow of information. Moreover, Mannix abstains from the usage of symbolic literary devices, such as metaphors, the absence of which warrants the text a higher degree of neutrality and appeal to logic.

The avoidance of emotive language ensures the degree of balance and objectivity present in the text. Even though the arguments are mainly provided by one side which results in a lack of broader context, the author manages to render the article convincing, by including data-driven reasoning and professional opinions. The memorability of the article lies in the tone of despair and impression of lost opportunities that it creates – even with minimal usage of emotive language the author manages to involve readers’ sentiments. The sense of reality is achieved through the incorporation of factual information and the acuteness of the issue covered. In this way, the message transmitted by the text appears to be clear enough to prevent the emergence of utterly dissimilar interpretations, despite the different ways the audience perceives information and cultural backgrounds.

The critical value of the media era is communication, the constant transfer of emotions, ideas, images that fill the modern human experience. In the process of virtual communication, media acts not only as an intermediary but also as a full participant in the communication process. The current socio‑political state of the world heightens the need for media analysis and criticism, as it is capable of defusing the manipulation and bias directed at constructing alternative visions of the situation.

Reference List

1. Alvermann, D. E., & Hagood, M. C. (2000) “Critical media literacy: Research, theory, and practice in “New Times”. The Journal of Educational Research, 93(3), 193–205.
2. Berger, A. A. (2017) Media analysis techniques, 6th edn. SAGE Publications.
3. Deutscher, P. and Lafont, C. (2017) Critical theory in critical times: Transforming the global political and economic order. Columbia University Press.
4. Elejalde, E., Ferres, L., & Herder, E. (2018) “On the nature of real and perceived bias in the mainstream media”, PLOS ONE , 13(3), pp. 1–28.
5. Fridkin, K., Wintersieck, A., Courey, J., & Thompson, J. (2017) “Race and police brutality: The importance of media framing”, International Journal of Communication, 11, pp. 3394–3414.
6. Hua, X., Li, K., Tan, Z., & Zhou, J. (2018) “Analysis of importance of new media literacy”, Proceedings of the 2018 8th International Conference on Social science and Education Research, pp. 370-373.
7. Kaulback, M. A brief history of media monitoring (and analysis) (2016)
8. Lurie, N., Saville, M., Hatchett, R., & Halton, J. (2020) “Developing Covid-19 Vaccines at Pandemic Speed”, The New England Journal of Medicine, pp. 1–5.
9. Mannix, L. “We were so close”: Three potential COVID-19 vaccines had funding cut) (2020)
10. Potapenko, S. (2016) “Rethinking Pathos: Media Rhetoric of Needs”, Vytauto Didžiojo Universitetas, 66, pp. 155-166.
11. Sim S. (2019) “Postmodern relativism: Jean-François Lyotard versus Jacques Derrida”. Post‑Truth, Scepticism & Power, pp. 97-123.
12. Stocchetti, M. and Kukkonen, K. (2011) Critical media analysis: An introduction for media professionals. Peter Lang.
13. Tung, L., Andreadakis, Z., Román, R., Tollefsen, S., Saville, M. & Mayhew, S. (2020) “The COVID-19 vaccine development landscape “, Nature Reviews Drug Discovery, 19, pp. 305–306.
14. Van Deursen, A. J. A. M. (2017) “Digital divide: Impact of media literacy”, The International Encyclopedia of Media Effects, pp. 1–8.