Elite Cueing and Public Opinion; Political Influence on the Ebola and Zika Outbreak Response and How it Shapes our Understanding of the Covid-19 Pandemic
photo: @introspectivedsgn
By Chloe Harper
Our modern society, more so than ever before, has reached a state of unprecedented connection. Whether it be our modes of travel or the hyper-informative reality of the digital world, our domestic and international communities are able to see, listen, and speak to one another at an unparalleled rate. In theory, this state of maximized communication has the opportunity to boost productive political collaboration, especially in response to disaster, international crisis, or other events in need of necessary, fast transmission. Yet in the context of public health, evidence has shown that our new connected world not only heightens the rate of communicable outbreaks, but is impacted by political influences in the form of elite cueing, partisanship, and news coverage.
In the Journal of Public Health Policy publication “Infectious disease, public health, and politics; United States response to Ebola and Zika”, HMP Governance Lab Collaborators Phillip Singer, Charley Willison, and Scott Greer utilize the United States’ response to the Ebola and Zika outbreaks as a case study to understand the complex relationship between politics, public opinion, and public health.
By referring to public opinion polls, news coverage, and congressional floor speeches, the authors show that both the Zika and Ebola outbreaks were complicated by elite cueing, which is a political methodology of influencing the public into upholding a partisan viewpoint regarding an issue, claim, or event.
For the Ebola Virus specifically, evidence shows that both congressional officials and news outlets used the outbreak as a means of political strategy rather than focusing on the disease in the context of public health. Republican elites skewed outbreak coverage to comment on the Obama administration and certain border / immigration policies, while Democratic elites, in the interest of Congressional midterm elections, limited coverage as an entirety to avoid damaging their electoral agenda. From both political standpoints, there was a lackluster response to the outbreak, one that was partisan and unfocused on the actual threats imposed by the Ebola Virus.
In the context of today’s political atmosphere and the COVID-19 pandemic, understanding public health and political cueing is more important than ever. As demonstrated by partisan attitudes regarding the COVID-19 pandemic, the differentiation among Republicans / Democrats and their representative government officials is stark and significant. Without addressing how polarized media and political response can be a detrimental influence on public health, our responses to disease and outbreaks are notably limited, and if overlooked, will fail to protect the health, well-being, and lives of the American public.
