Content Analysis of American Network News Coverage of Prevention Strategies During the Initial Wave of the COVID-19 Pandemic.

BACKGROUND: Broadcast media is a method to communicate health information to the general public and has previously been used in prior public health emergencies. Despite the current ubiquity of social media, traditional news programming retains relatively large audiences, which increased during the COVID-19 pandemic's early days. Viewership of broadcast media networks' evening news skews toward older groups (age 65 and up) which were vulnerable to health complications related to the COVID-19 pandemic. OBJECTIVES: The current study explored the trends in American broadcast network news media coverage of prevention during the initial wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Quantitative content analysis using the Public Health Framework for Prevention was used to analyze three major US media networks' evening news content for thematic trends in COVID-19 coverage during the first US pandemic wave from March to May 2020. SUBJECTS: A total of 117 episodes of the evening news, 39 from each of the three major US media networks, evenly divided among the first 13 weeks of the pandemic in the US. MAIN MEASURES: Outcome variables included average seconds of coverage per episode devoted to prevention strategies, COVID-19 coverage not related to prevention, and non-COVID-19 coverage. KEY RESULTS: The proportion of coverage dedicated to COVID-19 sharply increased in the first 2 weeks of March and decreased in the last 2 weeks of May. Networks focused approximately half the COVID-19 coverage time on prevention issues (288 seconds/episode) compared to non-prevention issues (538 seconds/episode). Prevention coverage varied over time. CONCLUSIONS: Although coverage included COVID-19 prevention content, more of the coverage was on other pandemic-related issues (e.g., economic impacts). Because public network news outlets have broad reach and accessibility, they could be an effective partner for public health agencies disseminating prevention messaging for current and future disease outbreaks and threats to public health.

To Battle COVID-19's Twin Economic and Health Crises, Medicaid Needs Flexible Funding Structures for Stabilization.

Medicaid, which provides health insurance to low-income Americans, is a joint federal-state partnership that manifests as 50 unique state programs. States have policy flexibility to design programs within federal parameters. However, Medicaid also requires funding flexibility to encourage states to maintain services during times of crisis when more people need Medicaid. Currently, Medicaid's funding formula, the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage (FMAP), adjusts federal spending by state levels of economic development but fails to adjust for nationwide recessions. During economic contractions, the federal government should use its ability to run budget deficits to reimburse states at higher rates in exchange for maintaining services. In turn, during economic expansions, states should shoulder relatively more costs of Medicaid. Although the current FMAP boost provided under the Families First Coronavirus Response Act has reduced strain on state Medicaid programs, it does not account for the severity of state-specific downturns and is limited to the current emergency. Instead of ad hoc, across-the-board FMAP boosts to respond to each crisis, Congress should pass legislation making automatic adjustments based on changes in state unemployment rates.

Long-Term Implications of Post-ACA Health Reform on State Health Care Policy.

In the midst of the COVID-19 outbreak, health care reform has again taken a major role in the 2020 election, with Democrats weighing Medicare for All against extensions of the Affordable Care Act, while Republicans quietly seem to favor proposals that would eliminate much of the ACA and cut Medicaid. Although states play a major role in health care funding and administration, public and scholarly debates over these proposals have generally not addressed the potential disruption that reform proposals might create for the current state role in health care. We examine how potential reforms influence state-federal relations, and how outside factors like partisanship and exogenous shocks like the COVID-19 pandemic interact with underlying preferences of each level of government. All else equal, reforms that expand the ACA within its current framework would provide the least disruption for current arrangements and allow for smoother transitions for providers and patients, rather than the more radical restructuring proposed by Medicare for All or the cuts embodied in Republican plans.