Communication Is Not a Virus: COVID-19 Vaccine-Critical Activity on Facebook and Implications for the 'Infodemic' Concept.

In February 2020 the World Health Organization declared an 'infodemic' in relation to COVID-19. The label infers that people are being contaminated by 'misinformation' as they would be by a virus. However, this metaphor conveys a simplistic empirical understanding of communication, which may encourage 'information control' responses. This article argues for the importance of understanding the diverse factors that impact the effectiveness of communication - including the context in which it is received, and the emergent properties created through communication processes. Analyzing 'vaccine-critical' Facebook activity in Australia between 1 December 2020 and 28 February 2022, we find that controlling access to or censoring vaccine-critical misinformation does not lead to a reduction in vaccine-critical narratives. Rather, discussions continue based on more tenable political and social arguments. Further, bans antagonize vaccine-critical Facebook users and encourage them to move to other platforms where they may be radicalized. Crucially, recruitment to vaccine-critical sites accelerated following both bans of 'misinformation' and the introduction of vaccine mandates, suggesting that such responses can lead to increased discontentment. Accordingly, we call for researchers, policy makers and media platforms to engage with a more nuanced view of communication, acknowledging the powerful role of audiences' uses and gratifications in determining the effectiveness of public health messaging.

How Vaccination Rumours Spread Online: Tracing the Dissemination of Information Regarding Adverse Events of COVID-19 Vaccines.

Objectives: To trace the emergence and dissemination of the most prominent rumours about potential adverse effects of COVID-19 vaccines. Methods: We use a weekly Google Trends search to gather information about what alleged adverse events are being associated with COVID vaccines by the general population. We then use CrowdTangle and Factiva searches to examine how discussions about the five most prominent adverse events have spread through traditional media channels and Facebook. Results: Traditional mass media reporting remains crucial in both promoting and moderating discussions around alleged adverse events. While some cases illustrate that social media networks can synthesise and amplify rumours about adverse events, traditional media coverage remains crucial as a forum for exploring and debunking spurious claims. Conclusion: Traditional media stories still bear signficant responsibility as credibility markers for rumours about vaccine adverse events. Journalists should therefore be encouraged to be particularly earnest when reporting such stories, and the scientific community should aid journalists in this task by clearly responding to any rumours emerging online.

Evidence that digital game players neglect age classification systems when deciding which games to play.

This article considers players' experiences seeking out new games to play, and their use of the Australian National Classification Scheme in doing so. The global video game industry is booming, with hundreds of games being released each month across numerous platforms. As a result, players have an unprecedented number of games available when choosing what games to purchase. However, a number of confounding issues around the emergent content of games and the subjective nature of game reviewing makes it difficult to relate what kinds of experiences a given game will facilitate. In this study, we surveyed game players in order to find their game platform and acquisition preferences; strategies and experiences when choosing games; and attitudes towards classification systems. Our findings suggest that players find it difficult to choose what games to purchase, and that existing classification systems are mostly only beneficial when choosing games for minors.

Coronavax: preparing community and government for COVID-19 vaccination: a research protocol for a mixed methods social research project.

INTRODUCTION: Ahead of the implementation of a COVID-19 vaccination programme, the interdisciplinary Coronavax research team developed a multicomponent mixed methods project to support successful roll-out of the COVID-19 vaccine in Western Australia. This project seeks to analyse community attitudes about COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine access and information needs. We also study how government incorporates research findings into the vaccination programme. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Coronavax protocol employs an analytical social media study, and a qualitative study using in-depth interviews with purposively selected community groups. Participant groups currently include healthcare workers, aged care workers, first responders, adults aged 65+ years, adults aged 30-64 years, young adults aged 18-29 years, education workers, parents/guardians of infants and young children (<5 years), parents/guardians of children aged 5-18 years with comorbidities and parents/guardians who are hesitant about routine childhood vaccines. The project also includes two studies that track how Australian state and Commonwealth (federal) governments use the study findings. These are functional dialogues (translation and discussion exercises that are recorded and analysed) and evidence mapping of networks within government (which track how study findings are used). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been granted by the Child and Adolescent Health Service Human Research Ethics Committee (HREC) and the University of Western Australia HREC. Study findings will be disseminated by a series of journal articles, reports to funders and stakeholders, and invited and peer-reviewed presentations.

Inaction, under-reaction action and incapacity: communication breakdown in Italy's vaccination governance.

This article explores why governments do not respond to public compliance problems in a timely manner with appropriate instruments, and the consequences of their failure to do so. Utilising a case study of Italian vaccination policy, the article considers counterfactuals and the challenges of governing health policy in an age of disinformation. It counterposes two methods of governing vaccination compliance: discipline, which uses public institutions to inculcate the population with favourable attitudes and practices, and modulation, which uses access to public institutions as a form of control. The Italian government ineffectively employed discipline for a number of years. Epistemological and organisational constraints stymied its efforts to tackle a significant childhood vaccination compliance problem. With a loss of control over the information environment, vaccinations were not served well by exogenous crises, the sensationalism of the news cycle and online misinformation. Hampered by austerity, lack of capacity and epistemic shortcomings, the Italian government did not protect the public legitimacy of the vaccination programme. Instead of employing communications to reassure a hesitant population, they focused on systemic and delivery issues, until it was too late to do anything except make vaccinations mandatory (using modulation). The apparent short-term success of this measure in generating population compliance does not foreclose the need for ongoing governance of vaccine confidence through effective discipline. This is evident for the COVID-19 vaccination campaign, with many Italians still indicating that they would not accept a vaccine despite the devastation that the disease has wrought throughout their country.