Faculty note: Political Talk—The Political Implications of Pandemic Language

In CAHSS and Effect, UW-Green Bay professors Alise Coen and David Coury look at the language used in regard to the current pandemic. “The spring of 2020 is now irrevocably intertwined with the word pandemic. On March 11, the Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO) assessed that, based on “the alarming levels of spread and severity” as well as “alarming levels of inaction,” COVID-19 must be characterized as a pandemic – something which could not easily be “controlled.” Other anxiety-inducing terms like crisis and emergency have also animated public conversations about the COVID-19 outbreak. On March 13, President Trump declared a “national emergency” in response to the spread of the coronavirus, drawing on executive authorities granted by the U.S. Constitution and laws such as the National Emergencies Act to activate a range of special provisions and presidential powers. In his presidential briefings, Trump has termed the virus a “medical crisis…a thing that nobody has seen for many, many decades.” Similarly, a wide range of media outlets have used the language of crisis in their coverage of COVID-19, with headlines in the New York Times, NPR, Fox News, and the Wall Street Journal repeatedly referencing “the Coronavirus Crisis.” It is easy to take these terms for granted as they increasingly saturate our media and political environments. But the words we use to describe situations like the current COVID-19 outbreak can be powerful, not only in shaping our interpretations and understandings of what is happening, but also in shaping our expectations of what constitutes appropriate responses. Let us begin with a deeper look at the origins of these terms.”