he past four months have been a case study in successful and failed communications from government leaders as the novel coronavirus turned into a global pandemic. To be sure, the lessons learned today will become instructive tools for our leaders of the future—particularly if pandemics and global crises increase in frequency and reach. So, nearly four months into this pandemic, what have we learned about good communication from our leaders?
Some heads of state—such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, South Korean President Moon Jae-in and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong—have been praised for their clear, early, calm and consistent communication. In contrast, other leaders have been reluctant to acknowledge the risks and the scope of the virus early on, which led to confusion and back-peddling.
While each country’s approach has differed and taken elements of others’ strategies, nearly all have faltered and had to adjust their policies and communications approach over the past few months. Thus far, early acknowledgement of the virus’s potential spread and deadly effects, coupled with stringent lock-down policies and stimulus funding to support economies—communicated early, consistently and alongside scientific and medical experts using all available forms of communication to reach as many demographics as possible—have led to the most clear and well-followed, life-saving directions.
Early Acknowledgement and Steady Response
Many countries, particularly China and Italy, were caught off-guard by the initial spread while others, including the United States and the United Kingdom, refused to acknowledge the rapid proliferation and effects of the virus. In Italy, the government initially lost control of the narrative as its draft plans for initial limits on personal movements were leaked to the media, sowing confusion, uncertainty and fear in the public. These failures demonstrate the importance of early acknowledgement of a fast-moving virus, control of plans to prevent leaks, confusion and the spread of disease, and establishment of credible authority with the public.
Interestingly, one of the smallest countries—Singapore—has had one of the most rapid responses and clear communications to prevent spread of the virus and limit the number of deaths. Implementing learnings from the SARS outbreak and the swine flu pandemic, Singapore established a multi-ministry task force based on a “whole of government” approach early on. Clear, consistent communication across ministries and a government delivery of masks to each household limited panic buying and hoarding. Prime Minister Loong also made three national addresses, each time speaking in three of the four official languages to maximize reach of his message and establish trust with citizens.
State vs. Federal Competing Narratives
In certain places, a crowded communications field developed based on the countries’ unique political systems. In the United States, President Trump defaulted to the states to the point that they had to compete against one another and other countries for supplies, while differing lockdown rules sowed confusion and spread of the virus across state lines. Despite the chaos, governors and mayors have stepped up. According to a Monmouth University poll, more than 70 percent of Americans say their respective state's governor has "done a good job" in responding to the pandemic—while only half support the federal response.
In Italy, the information given in daily press conferences weren’t always coordinated between mayors, regional authorities and the national government, and some mayors have taken to social media or patrolling their city streets to admonish citizens. In Germany, despite initial differences in response and communication between the federal states, once a national lockdown was enacted, state leaders began working closely together with Chancellor Merkel’s government. In both countries, people eventually grasped the reality of the dire situation with increased and more clearly coordinated government communications.
Reliance on Medical and Scientific Expertise
Germany, the UK, and the United States decided early to rely on scientific expertise for decision-making and public communications. The inclusion of medical and epidemic experts in daily press briefings allows more clear, straightforward and scientific facts to be shared directly with the media and public, lessening the view that decisions are politically motivated. However, the approach has not gone without criticism. For example, in Germany some have pushed back on the idea that the country be “run” by scientists rather than politicians.
Beloved, Trusted Spokespeople
Unique to the UK, while there had been some initial criticism that Her Majesty the Queen waited until early April to address the country, her well-drafted speech and the timing of the address—following a fortnight of lockdown, and immediately before news of Prime Minister Johnson’s move to the ICU—lifted spirits and provided a sense of continuity and reassurance. While many other countries do not have this non-partisan option, the royal family has stood out in its efforts to support the country’s healthcare workers and provide comfort to their loyal followers.
While the global media must continue fact-checking in real time to prevent the spread of disinformation, everyone—from government officials to the media to citizens—can now look back at the initial government responses to see which countries best responded and where and how true leaders emerged in this global crisis. Overall, early acknowledgement, a clear and coordinated plan between cities, states and the federal government, paired with scientific and medical expertise creates the most successful response to a global pandemic.
a global affairs media network
How to Communicate Clearly During a Pandemic
April 22, 2020
T
he past four months have been a case study in successful and failed communications from government leaders as the novel coronavirus turned into a global pandemic. To be sure, the lessons learned today will become instructive tools for our leaders of the future—particularly if pandemics and global crises increase in frequency and reach. So, nearly four months into this pandemic, what have we learned about good communication from our leaders?
Some heads of state—such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, South Korean President Moon Jae-in and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong—have been praised for their clear, early, calm and consistent communication. In contrast, other leaders have been reluctant to acknowledge the risks and the scope of the virus early on, which led to confusion and back-peddling.
While each country’s approach has differed and taken elements of others’ strategies, nearly all have faltered and had to adjust their policies and communications approach over the past few months. Thus far, early acknowledgement of the virus’s potential spread and deadly effects, coupled with stringent lock-down policies and stimulus funding to support economies—communicated early, consistently and alongside scientific and medical experts using all available forms of communication to reach as many demographics as possible—have led to the most clear and well-followed, life-saving directions.
Early Acknowledgement and Steady Response
Many countries, particularly China and Italy, were caught off-guard by the initial spread while others, including the United States and the United Kingdom, refused to acknowledge the rapid proliferation and effects of the virus. In Italy, the government initially lost control of the narrative as its draft plans for initial limits on personal movements were leaked to the media, sowing confusion, uncertainty and fear in the public. These failures demonstrate the importance of early acknowledgement of a fast-moving virus, control of plans to prevent leaks, confusion and the spread of disease, and establishment of credible authority with the public.
Interestingly, one of the smallest countries—Singapore—has had one of the most rapid responses and clear communications to prevent spread of the virus and limit the number of deaths. Implementing learnings from the SARS outbreak and the swine flu pandemic, Singapore established a multi-ministry task force based on a “whole of government” approach early on. Clear, consistent communication across ministries and a government delivery of masks to each household limited panic buying and hoarding. Prime Minister Loong also made three national addresses, each time speaking in three of the four official languages to maximize reach of his message and establish trust with citizens.
State vs. Federal Competing Narratives
In certain places, a crowded communications field developed based on the countries’ unique political systems. In the United States, President Trump defaulted to the states to the point that they had to compete against one another and other countries for supplies, while differing lockdown rules sowed confusion and spread of the virus across state lines. Despite the chaos, governors and mayors have stepped up. According to a Monmouth University poll, more than 70 percent of Americans say their respective state's governor has "done a good job" in responding to the pandemic—while only half support the federal response.
In Italy, the information given in daily press conferences weren’t always coordinated between mayors, regional authorities and the national government, and some mayors have taken to social media or patrolling their city streets to admonish citizens. In Germany, despite initial differences in response and communication between the federal states, once a national lockdown was enacted, state leaders began working closely together with Chancellor Merkel’s government. In both countries, people eventually grasped the reality of the dire situation with increased and more clearly coordinated government communications.
Reliance on Medical and Scientific Expertise
Germany, the UK, and the United States decided early to rely on scientific expertise for decision-making and public communications. The inclusion of medical and epidemic experts in daily press briefings allows more clear, straightforward and scientific facts to be shared directly with the media and public, lessening the view that decisions are politically motivated. However, the approach has not gone without criticism. For example, in Germany some have pushed back on the idea that the country be “run” by scientists rather than politicians.
Beloved, Trusted Spokespeople
Unique to the UK, while there had been some initial criticism that Her Majesty the Queen waited until early April to address the country, her well-drafted speech and the timing of the address—following a fortnight of lockdown, and immediately before news of Prime Minister Johnson’s move to the ICU—lifted spirits and provided a sense of continuity and reassurance. While many other countries do not have this non-partisan option, the royal family has stood out in its efforts to support the country’s healthcare workers and provide comfort to their loyal followers.
While the global media must continue fact-checking in real time to prevent the spread of disinformation, everyone—from government officials to the media to citizens—can now look back at the initial government responses to see which countries best responded and where and how true leaders emerged in this global crisis. Overall, early acknowledgement, a clear and coordinated plan between cities, states and the federal government, paired with scientific and medical expertise creates the most successful response to a global pandemic.
