









































Communication, Society and Media 
ISSN 2576-5388 (Print) ISSN 2576-5396 (Online) 

Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 
www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm 

47 
 

Original Paper 

The Mystification and Demystification of Shared Information on 

COVID-19 across Cyber Mediated News Networks: A 

Sociological Approach to Solutions for Vulnerable Populations 
Prof. Dr. Emmanuel K. Ngwainmbi1* 

1 Department of Communication Studies, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA 
* Prof. Dr. Emmanuel K. Ngwainmbi, Department of Communication Studies, University of North 

Carolina, Charlotte, North Carolina, USA 

 

Received: June 4, 2020         Accepted: June 14, 2020          Online Published: June 19, 2020 

doi:10.22158/csm.v3n3p47                      URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.22158/csm.v3n3p47 

 

Abstract 

The Coronavirus (Covid-19) hit the news headlines as a pandemic bound to affect millions of people 

around the world, and news media took responsibility to warn people, country heads, businesses, and 

private and non-governmental institutions about the virus. However, stories swirling on social media 

platforms about the origin and nature of Covid-19 as well as questionable reporting by established 

news networks have left the public questioning the integrity of the real causes of the virus, how it 

spreads and whether treatment standards equate the hoopla about the genesis of the “pandemic.” This 

paper reviews narratives about the mystification and demystification of Covid-19. It departs from the 

premise that the media frames ways in which people consume and use news. The paper then suggests 

how policymakers should handle newsflows on Covid-19, how consumers should screen news, and how 

journalists should report Covid-19 ethically.  

Keywords 

Coronavirus, COVID-19, demystification, fake news, policymakers, media framing, social media, cable 

news, poor 

 

1. Background 

Social media networks are adept at sharing large volumes of data to known and unknown groups about 

news in their locale and elsewhere, without recourse to their immediate or long term impact on 

recipients. Audiences, (henceforth used interchangeably here as “consumers” or “users”) typically do 

not bother to check the authenticity of the news or its source. News consumers are not only social 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
48 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

media users; they include billions of people around the world who own or have access to one or more 

media gadgets. But the new envoys (social media gadgets)—and their master—social media companies 

are bearing the brunt of criticism from consumers who want facts and useful information to help them 

make informed decisions. Users distrust social media companies and cybercriminals, citing Facebook, 

Twitter, and other forms of platforms as contributing to their lack of trust. A survey of online users 

conducted globally in 2019 by the Global Survey on Internet Security and Trust shows global distrust 

of social media information. The Center for International Governance Innovation, a global research 

think-tank in a study published June 10, 2019, revealed that 89% of people in Canada, 88% in Nigeria, 

83% in Australia, 63% in Hong Kong, 64% in Korea, and 88% in North America who distrust the 

Internet cited social media as responsible for their distrust (www.cigionline.org/internet/05/30/2020). 

Information shared on social media platforms has consequences on the economic, political, and 

diplomatic futures of nations. Governments also explore ways of utilizing digital media to pursue their 

foreign policies because such media can indeed offer opportunities and challenges for strategic 

operations. Countries with advanced digital technology use public diplomacy to understand cultures, 

attitudes, and behavior, build and manage relationships; and influence thoughts and mobilize actions to 

advance their interests and values (Melissen, 2013, p. 436). That statement is at the epicenter of 

subsequent discussions in this paper as it navigates the nuances of nations feeding their people with 

life-threatening information through social media platforms and cable media networks.  

Decision-makers in countries know how best to use digital technology to promote their national and 

transnational agendas. Nevertheless, it is troublesome to postulate that social media networks—news 

and information sharing channels—are uniquely responsible for how we should treat data recipients. 

Network users also share data to bring valuable and entertaining content to others, to (1) inform others 

of products and services people care about that can potentially change opinions or encourage action; (2) 

enlighten others about our personality; develop our relationships by staying in touch with them; (3) 

share information to allow others feel important and get more involved in our community and the world; 

(4) or advance causes we think they also care about. That sense of belonging is what makes us human. 

As part of our humanity, we invariably nurse a desire to belong to a small group or community or 

operate in intangible or ultra-terrestrial space. Based on that framework, we examine how information 

about the Corona Virus (Covid-19) has been managed in the media. 

 

2. Theoretical Frameworks 

For this paper, we apply the issue agenda-setting and media framing theories that describe how 

audiences get to see or hear information with novel ideas about the way the world works, why they face 

difficulties, and the mechanisms available for solving challenges. Framing is when data is highlighted 

to be noticed as the most important. Framing is used in many ways to assess how media content frames 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
49 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

events and objects (Dorman and Krasnow, 2014). Framing describes the practice of thinking about 

news items and stories within a familiar context. ‘Framing’ focuses on public issues at hand rather than 

on a particular topic. It has been used to explore newspaper coverage, how good the articles were, and 

whether or not solutions were there surrounding the issue (Gordon et al., 2010). Typically, news 

discourse involving public policy is carefully constructed because public figures and interest groups 

take a proactive approach to 'frame' their views of the issue. For Dorfman and Krasnow (2014), 

framing is the process of reconciling new information with a dose of prior understanding. This means 

that people consciously or unconsciously weigh further information against well-formed ideas that have 

been reinforced in their thinking over time.  

This paper follows the socio-cognitive process of news and information management wherein three 

agents—the news source, media, and audience members—play the same roles and enjoy the same 

outcomes. The basis of the framing theory is that the media focuses attention on specific events and 

then places them in a general context. This paper grows from the underlying issue agenda-setting 

theory, which speaks to the media’s attempts to influence audiences and establish a hierarchy of news 

and information prevalence to such audiences.  

In that same framework, we contend that sociological thought processes help us to explain and predict 

the social world. Sociologists have identified two types of functions: manifest and latent. The 

functionalist perspective emphasizes how parts of a society are structured to maintain its stability. 

Sociologists agree that a process may disrupt a social system or lead to a decrease in instability in any 

community. To understand how information is received and perceived around the world or consider 

plans to use information that can help the population succeed, we have to invoke the uses of 

gratifications and issues agenda perspectives and how the media frames messages to convince us. Our 

locus for using those principles is premised on the fact that people do not typically react to a 

phenomenon in a vacuum; instead, they act based on what they know, meaning that information can 

provoke emotions. 

In this study, we define vulnerable populations as poor persons and groups living in densely populated 

regions with limited access to social media gadgets and low capacity to assess news and information or 

differentiate fake messages from accurate messages. Vulnerable groups include people who depend on 

their government to get access to resources.  

This paper also grows from the stance that misinformation has a powerful effect both on the receiver(s), 

the generators of fake news, and the established/professional news media agencies. The challenge of 

fake news has emerged as a new caveat to measure credibility and trust in journalism as a profession. 

Studies show that journalists and professional news agencies are increasingly struggling to compete 

with social media networks in serving their audiences with the product—news. Cable news networks 

and social media groups around the world are locked in a perennial battle to reach more people, keep 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
50 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

and feed them with news about happenings in the locale, and around the world. So, television 

journalists source and receive news from sources with ulterior motives, aware that specific sources give 

information for their benefits; for example, during political competitions, rival candidates and their 

supporters want to slant the news to settle political scores. Others give unverifiable information for 

economic benefits where competing businesses seek advantages over their competitors to sway 

perceptions of customers.  

Editors and reporters on television stations face a myriad of challenges in spotting fake news 

(Ngwainmbi, 2019). Established cable television and radio news networks have lost viewers to 

competing media channels because they lack authoritative contacts to confirm the authenticity of the 

news. Mutagen, Nyambuga, and Mate (2020) have found that television stations trusted as new 

gatherers in specific locations also become a challenge when they develop the urge to make quick and 

more cash.  

 

3. Analyses 

3.1 The Psychology of Creating, Managing, and Vitalizing Fake News 

Fake news is frequently well-orchestrated and timely, making it appeal to preconceived thoughts and 

ideas in the minds of the target consumers. This practice is equally a challenge to news teams, 

particularly the editors waging war against fake news. When a false story camouflages real news, it 

becomes a virus; therefore, spotting it is made more difficult. By the same token, when unmonitored 

activities on social media platforms undermine fact-based reporting, we must expect researchers to 

respond. Moreover, depending on a country's media laws, there may be legal consequences for 

established news networks that disseminate fake news while competing with other news networks for 

higher ratings. 

Looking at it from the gatekeeper stance that conceptualized this study, we acknowledge that editors 

spot fake news at the filter gates of all news. News sharing is a psychological gem in that people are 

naturally more interested in spreading rumors and dangerous information than receiving good news, 

unless such news is of some benefit to the receivers. Psychologists inform us that determined people 

start rumors to feel superior to the receiver, get attention, or take control of the receiving group. People 

feel better about themselves if others feel worse. If someone knows something others do not know, 

he/she becomes the center of attention, although constant rumor-mongering may ruin one's reputation. 

People who want to be in control are adept at spreading rumors. Typically, people who believe they are 

more popular or have accomplished within their community tend to spread rumors (false news). Those 

with social media tools are more likely to forward fake news because they feel they would be 

appreciated or acknowledged by recipients. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
51 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Rumor consumers feel a desire to belong—the pressure to do the same when everybody else in the 

group is gossiping. People may also spread rumors when bored and need excitement. Rumor 

mongering, the synonym for 'fake news' has become the desired means of getting informed. In the 

context of morale and national safety, rumor can cause needless alarm, raise extravagant hopes, or 

unpleasant consequences, as Allport and Postman (1947) found in the study of the American society 

during the Second World War II.  

Fake news is a fast-growing trend in the 21st Century in almost all aspects of life. It continues to distort 

people’s beliefs even after it has been debunked. A 2017 study published in the Journal Intelligence 

suggests that some people may have an especially difficult time rejecting misinformation. As Matugi, 

Nyamboga, and Matu found in a study (2020), the population in Kenya has also been a victim of fake 

news with misinformation on politics, political leaders, judiciary, and universities often broadcast of 

television as real news. Consequently, some television stations in that country have been sued for 

disseminating fake news. In a rush to scoop stories on TV as breaking news ahead of their competitor, 

such media are guilty of spreading false claims, a practice that contradicts the normative principles of 

journalism and mass communication. This is troublesome because repeating a false claim increases its 

believability and subsequently makes a claim appear to be truthful, just as a pathological liar believes 

that by always telling lies and to a willing listener, he starts thinking he is trustworthy. The key message 

here is that our longevity and consistency in receiving information shape our worldview; the longer we 

consume information in the same style and format, our vulnerability becomes predictable.  

Through education, people may develop meta-cognitive skills—strategies for monitoring and 

regulating one's thinking—that can be used to combat the effects of misinformation. There exists a 

connection between cognitive ability and our vulnerability to fake news. Among adulthoods, for 

example, this ability declines considerably with advancing age, suggesting that older adults are more 

susceptible to misinformation (Hambrick & Marquardt, 2018). Princeton University and the New York 

University’s Social Media and Political Participation Lab researchers claim that people aged 65 and 

older are four times more likely to share fake news on popular social media platforms than younger 

people. U.S. News staff writer, Alexa Lardieri on January 9, 2019, reported that older people were not 

only more susceptible to fake news, but they also shared fake news stories during the 2016 U.S. 

Presidential election.  

To further understand why fake news goes viral online, we should assess the connections between the 

sender's intentions and how we perceive the receiver's intentions. News spreads through secondary 

sources, what is known as the two-step flow style. Social media consumers typically get their news 

from public figures, political activists, and opinion leaders who pick information from the mass media 

or create their own. The two-step flow style reminds us that we, the wider population get information 

from opinion leaders who interpret information and add original media content. So, persons with no 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
52 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

direct access to news technology are most likely to rely on the interpretations of news shared by 

opinion leaders than getting news firsthand. This can be dangerous because opinion leaders and 

firsthand news receivers may not/do not necessarily have full knowledge of the story, that is, its origin 

and its components. Some “news accessors” do not have the intellectual acumen to package and deliver 

key news components with consistency as trained journalists. That is common practice with social 

media users who play the dubious role of opinion leader and news-setter and distribute it based on how 

they think the receiver would value it. To summarize, the way information is packaged and shared, and 

the sourcing of the information determine its news value. To that end, we discuss next the sociology of 

news and information and how news spreads. 

3.2 Sociology of News and Information and How News Spreads 

Information is the tree from which news grows and yields fruits. The news media, by default, is the 

fertilizer because it gives the population news and information to meet needs. These include 

enlightening oneself, entertaining, instructing, understanding the world, making informed decisions, or 

rethatching emotions.  

News, by definition, is something that is newly received; it is noteworthy information about important 

events. If individuals were to pick an important event, each piece of information would be remarkable 

and such individuals would convince everyone else to believe the information is newsworthy. However, 

that is impossible because the individual must have resources to identify and collect information and 

make it newsworthy to everyone else. What is possible is that resourceful parties pick information that 

can be delivered as news. They do so to get fulfillment. 

Conversely, the absence of knowledge does not create the curiosity to know. Fazio et al. (2015) have 

aptly stated that knowledge neglect, or the failure to apply stored knowledge appropriately, occurs in 

tasks other than those involving judgment of truth. By the same logic, the knowledge that flows in one 

direction can easily influence one's decision, even if he/she already possesses stored knowledge. That 

view is supported by a 2015 study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology, where Lisa 

Fazio and her colleagues found that people rarely engage in source monitoring when evaluating 

information from their knowledge bank.  

When people get information, they look for ingredients like truth, the illusion of reality, stored 

knowledge neglected, among others. In short, information breeds curiosity. The normative meaning of 

the term, “curious” explains why news of any kind, including COVID-19, can kindle feelings of fear 

and awe, no matter what its existing linguistic, historical, socio-ethnic, religious, educational, political 

or socio-economic origin. For the adjective “curious,” culled from the root Latin term, “curiosus” 

synonymous to “eagerly inquiring,” “diligent,” “careful,” “meddling” speaks to an innate desire to 

teach knowledge. Even in Medieval French culture, specifically, the 14th Century, the term “curios” 

(among the British, “curious”) meant 'inquisitive,” “odd,” “strange,” which makes you anxious. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
53 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Consequently, anything one doesn't know is 'news' because it makes one curious, anxious.  

The sourcing of things new is guided by four factors--the social currency of the message, its value, 

ability to understand the mental state, of oneself and others (mentalizing), and intention. If the message 

carrier believes the message has value, the carrier then takes into account the needs of the receiver. Our 

senses—sight, hearing, smell, taste and touch, and assess—are always ready to manage messages we 

receive. We are, inherently, curious to know what is happening around us to satisfy our desire to be 

included. The more one values an idea he/she is more likely to share it. Thus, we can predict which 

messages will go viral and which ones will not, based on how we process the value of the words we 

share and how we perceive the receiver's potential reactions to our message. Srini Pillay, 

NeuroBusiness Group CEO, has advanced that two circuits operate in the sender's brain: the “reward” 

circuit, which registers the value of the message to the sender, and the “mentalizing” circuit, which 

activates when the sender sees things from the person who receives the message. Let us not be 

preposterous here, for the receiver executes curiosity differently. Our perceptual 

curiosity—feelings—can differ when we see something that surprises us, puzzles us, or does not match 

up with something we thought we knew. Perceptual curiosity may vary from our natural desire to 

learn—what neuroscience calls “epistemological curiosity.” Even the Romanian-born internationally 

recognized Israeli-American astrophysicist Mario Livio (2017) has professed that we allow ourselves to 

learn everything to cope with our environment and make fewer mistakes as young learners. Our 

curiosity diminishes as we learn more of the same thing or get older learning it. Tied to such telescope 

space science is the fundamental logic behind people’s choice to share or receive factual and fake news 

through the media. 

 Networks can also use it to promote their agenda within the community. In the next segment, we 

attempt to diffuse what prompts people to create and distribute fake news and information to recipients 

they know and people they do not know.  

3.3 How COVID-19 Became News 

News is generated by persons with trained eyes, ears, and brains to find and deliver information 

differently. They pick an event among others occurring in the community. They write about it on their 

platform, interview people about the event, report information to readers and viewers they believe 

might be interested in it, and monitor people who have exhibited an interest in the event. If that 

procedure is not followed, we may consider the event to be a cluster of information, not news. 

Monitoring is done to determine the extent of the audience's interest in the news. To know why 

COVID-19 became news, and why there is so much mystery, panic, and special attention around 

Covid-19, we need to understand what the virus is, and how it was presented to consumers as news, not 

information. Reports produced by health experts show that people with Covid-19 (Coronavirus) 

symptoms may have a persistent cough, shortness of breath, difficulty breathing, fever, chills, muscle 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
54 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

pain, sore throat, or loss of taste and smell. Symptoms may appear 2-14 days after exposure to the virus. 

If it is not treated promptly, the patient may become sick, have antibodies that fight the disease, or die. 

Based on that information, coronavirus symptoms are similar to those detected in flu patients. 

Literature recorded so far has elevated information about the coronavirus to the level of news. Here are 

some reasons why the coronavirus is newsworthy. 

Chinese authorities reported the first case of coronavirus disease 2019 on November 17, 2019. 

According to The Guardian newspaper (November 17, 2019), unpublished data with the Chinese 

government showed that the disease had been detected weeks before the media and Chinese authorities 

announced the emergency. The South China Morning Post reported that Chinese authorities had 

identified at least 266 people who contracted the virus and came under medical surveillance 

The most powerful news agencies around the world simultaneously reported the rapid spread of 

coronavirus around the world, and various social media networks redistributed the reports in 

mid-January 2020. Coronavirus became big news after information about its origin, and its potentials 

had been shrouded in secrecy, creating a vacuum of knowledge and fantasies in social media networks 

and the cable news media all over the world. After Chinese journalist, Chen Qiushi, published an article 

in the Washington Post, February 9, 2020, offering chilling glimpses of patients' conditions in hospitals 

in Wuhan, China, the zone identified for the first cases, the Chinese government adept at censoring the 

press in China arrested the journalist. The event coincided with cruise ships arriving the Italian, Spanish, 

and U.S. shores with infected patients. Next was the rising death tolls in Italy, Spain, and the U.S. Then, 

New York Times reported that the government of Wuhan, China, had confirmed that health authorities 

were treating dozens of cases after researchers identified a “new virus” that had infected dozens in Asia. 

Another New York Times article published January 11, 2020, announced the first known death from the 

Coronavirus in China. The same newspaper on January 20 reported that U.S., Japan, South Korea, 

Thailand, and other countries had confirmed cases. On January 30, 2020, the Director of the World 

Health Organization declared a global health emergency, and the U.S. State Department warned U.S. 

travelers to avoid going to China. The Trump administration closed its borders to travelers from China 

on January 31. On February 11, the virus was officially named Covid-19, and 24 countries had infected 

people. This was followed by 443 quarantined passengers released from Diamond Princess Cruise ship, 

followed on February 23, by a significant surge in infected cases in Italy and infection hikes in Europe 

and the U.S. Those reports were invariably broadcast by the Associated Press, Reuters, Agence France 

Presse, and United Press International. Independent news agencies around the world also picked up the 

story and disseminated versions in major world languages like Swahili, Portuguese, German, Mandarin, 

Hindustani, Arabic, Russian, Malay, and Bengali. The story about how, why, and where the virus was 

spreading had been shared in more than 190 languages in millions of network groups, giving it high 

relevance as the biggest story on mainstream media around the world.  



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
55 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Those activities equally brought the spotlight on the story, prompting world-renowned journalists Wolf 

Blitzer, Christiane Amanpour, Rachel Maddow, and teams of reporters worldwide to report on the 

origin and spread of the virus. On May 30, 2020, the New York Times reported the arrest of Chen by 

Chinese authorities and the death of the Chinese whistleblower doctor, Li Wenliang, who tried to warn 

the public about coronavirus, following conflicting reports about his condition on state media. The 

report incited the press to probe reasons for the happenings. The secrecy around those events raised 

media interest in the story as reporters went to Wuhan to expand coverage of the incidents.  

Country leaders then joined the media to make the public more aware of the pandemic. The Trump 

administration and its team of health experts started daily press conferences about the pandemic and 

related government measures, carried by major news networks. News consumers tweeted and retweeted 

rumors about root causes of the pandemic, treatments, infection rates, and death tolls, giving more 

attention than other broadcasts. The messages were redistributed at least twice from February through 

June 2020 in networked groups as cable news television stations provided lengthy daily coverage of 

stories about the pandemic.  

3.4 Public Opinions in Support and Denial of the Mystery behind the Pandemic 

Stories about the political history, existence, and spread of coronavirus can be traced in growing 

literature published in refereed science journals, media broadcasts, blogs, and online postings from real 

medical professionals informed reporters, opinion leaders, government leaders, unverified sources and 

religious bodies. A U.S. Senator complained in a Fox News program broadcast in May 2020 that the 

pandemic started in a Chinese lab in Wuhan, leading to a cultural politics war.  

Public relations and advocacy wars have been flaring among religious and non-religious bodies 

determined to shape world opinion on whether to authenticate the virus as a threat to human life or the 

manipulation of the world population for socio-economic benefits. For example, a group of senior 

conservative Catholic Clergy described Covid-19 as a pretext for governments to deprive people of 

their freedom and track their movements.  

Similarly, the right-wing populist combative rhetoric considers global efforts to contain the pandemic 

as a pretext to erase Christian civilization and create a hate-filled technocratic tyranny. The fact that 

German Bishops dismiss the clergy's widely disseminated complaint as a conspiracy theory in a press 

release published in the Catholic News Service (KNA), May 12, 2020, reminds us that facts about the 

virus are more necessary than conspiracies and theories.  

Whatever the media platforms, faith-based institutions have used to present their impressions of the 

sociopolitical and economic impact of the virus on human communities, those persons serving on the 

frontlines of the pandemic such as bus drivers, lab technicians, and hospital personnel have shared 

experiences we must not ignore. Autopsy reports, lab tests, and other serological experiments show a 

direct link between Covid-19 infection rates and race-based socially induced health conditions such as 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
56 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

diabetes, high blood pressure, leukemia, heart conditions, older people, and high death rates. In 

particular, a nurse practitioner treating patients in California analyzed the causes of their death as 

follows: 
“The government and the church may reopen when they want. They can come up 

with conspiracies as they choose, but one thing I know is that Corona is real, there is 

no proven treatment for it, no vaccine yet and the only thing I can do is wash my 

hands, wear a mask and limit the frequency of interacting with big groups of people. I 

say, let them open churches, schools, and businesses. Was it a hoax when 700+ 

coffins were churches in Italy every day, and all those people dying in N.Y. City and 

elsewhere pretended to die? I hope the people who are making all those declarations 

never have to die of Covid-19” (Personal WhatsApp interview, May 23, 2020). 

There is extensive evidence that the virus emerged from animals and transmitted to people. Research 

conducted by national and international agencies in state-sponsored labs and labs funded by big donors 

operating under the pretext of serving university research centers continues to publish reports about 

diagnostic techniques, transmission methods, and criteria for identifying people at high risk of 

contracting the virus. The Center for Disease Control, the Johns Hopkins University, Babraham 

Institute, and the University of Cambridge, England, together have repeatedly encouraged people to 

wear face masks in public and wash hands to reduce infection rates.  

3.5 How Social Media Is Reshaping News about Covid-19 

Scientists and established cable news networks have debunked most stories circulating on social media 

networks about COVID-19 as conspiracy theories. We know that a conspiracy theory is when powerful 

groups, often in political motivation, push forward an explanation for the existence of an event or a 

situation when other examples are more probable. In the turbulence of news about coronavirus 

pandemic, it might be challenging to differentiate a scam or rumor from vital information.  

Social media’s primary advantage over the traditional news network is its ability to make news a social 

entity. Social media groups make it increasingly difficult for established cable networks to provide 

up-to-date news and information to their respective audiences partly because cyber communities are 

more aggressive in producing and disseminating news than established news organs. News organs take 

time to fact check, verify sources, and edit news before broadcasting it. At the same time, social media 

users simply write and share stories they feel others might be interested in reading. This leads to 

misinformation.  

To better understand why there is too much misinformation on social media about the coronavirus, we 

need to know how cognitive science explains human interaction. John Cook and Stephan 

Lewandowsky, authors of the Conspiracy Handbook, have argued that conspiracy theories erode public 

trust in government and medical institutions upon which the public itself depends on accurate 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
57 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

information. Cook and Lewandowsky (2020, p. 3) posit that conspiracy theories are not supported by 

evidence that can withstand scrutiny, but this does not stop them from blossoming. Instead of going to a 

neighbor with thoughts on a topic published in the newspaper, social media users instead join forums 

and discuss breaking news. Since January 2020, the French news agency, (Agence France Presse,) 

which reaches 168 countries; the Associated Press, which reaches 106 countries; Reuters, which has 

over 750 television broadcasts in 115 countries; and United Press International that reaches 92 

countries with a Spanish version for Latin America have delivered the majority of breaking news about 

the virus.  

Overall, the news, coronavirus, has transformed how we think, work, entertain ourselves, or treat our 

friends and families.  

3.6 Facts and Fiction about Covid-19 

Due to widespread interest in the pandemic perpetuated by social media networks, country leaders, and 

cable news media, people have been inundated with unconfirmed reports. People appear more confused 

today than when the news about the virus was first released because they do not know which source has 

provided accurate information. As of June 2, 2020, there were 6.6 million confirmed cases of 

COVID-19 infection; 371,000 deaths and 216 countries, areas, or territories with cases. Among those, 

the U.S., whose population is 331 million, had over 1.8 million confirmed cases, the highest in the 

world, followed by Brazil with half a million. The countries with the highest cases and limited recovery 

rates were based in the Western world (see Table 1). 

 

Table 1. Countries most affected by COVID-19 in Early 2020 
Location Confirmed Recovered Deaths 

United States 
1.85M 

+16,070 

412K 107K 

+478 

Brazil 
531K 

+11,598 

241K 30,079 

+623 

Russia 
424K 

+9,035 

187K 5,037 

+162 

United Kingdom 
276K 

+1,570 

- 39,045 

+0 

Spain 240K 150K 27,127 

Source: Wikipedia. Retrieved June 2, 2020 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
58 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

From a regional perspective, the virus seems to have devastating consequences, as well as seen below. 

 

Table 2. Statistics by Region, May 12, 2020 

Regions Infection cases deaths (4 261) 

Africa 46 829 cases (2 296) 1 449 deaths (34) 

Americas 1 743 717 cases (41 266) 104 549 deaths (2 675) 

Eastern Mediterranean 274 027 cases (8 863) 9 138 deaths (125) 

Europe 1 755 790 cases (24 184) 157 880 deaths (1 277) 

South-East Asia 105 901 cases (5 020) 3 597 deaths (116) 

Western Pacific 161 872 cases (962) 6 527 deaths (34) 

Source: World Health Organization. May 12, 2020 

 

Given the current world population of 7.6 billion people, the pandemic has been spreading at a faster 

rate beyond the estimates provided by the US-based Center for Disease Control (CDC). The respected 

health organization had predicted 1.4 million would be infected with 100,000 deaths in the U.S. by 

June 1, 2020, giving optimists and conspiracy theorists room to criticize efforts to slow the disease. 

Still, for economists, the virus is spreading at a frenetic pace, and the numbers can easily quadruple by 

2021 and cause a recession worldwide if an effective vaccine is not found. Since the World Health 

Organization and the Columbia University School of public health scientists announced that 

COVID-19 was a global pandemic in January 2020, social media platforms have filled 80% of their 

content with versions of the disease. Clinical studies with first infections in Wuhan, China, and reports 

from PREDICT, a U.S. funded global program investigating the virus in animals, as well as cable news 

media coverage, appear to have negatively influenced public opinion about the cause and nature of the 

illness.  

We wonder whether social media networks can compete with cable news media in sharing coronavirus 

messages. More curiously, it would be more challenging to determine whether cable news agencies, 

scientists, or social media that is creating a frenzy, prejudice, or rumor about the Covid-19 that can 

jeopardize global collaboration to reduce the spread of the virus and find a cure successfully.  

To complicate matters, the world health governing body, WHO, reportedly ignited the controversy over 

the source of the pandemic and the way countries were managed it when the Trump administration 

announced the WHO hierarchy had been slow in warning the world of the severity of Covid-19 and 

threatened to suspend funding the WHO. That announcement fueled rumors that the global health 

watchdog, heavily funded by China and other countries, was protecting Chinese interest. The U.S. 

President, Fox News, and a U.S. Senator in April 2020, equally threatened economic sanctions against 

China, accusing the country of creating the virus and destroying the world's economy. Those 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
59 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

allegations led 27 public health scientists in the U.S. and around the globe to present scientific evidence 

to questionable online information distributors in support of the scientists, public health professionals, 

and medical professionals in China. Charles Calisher, Dennis Carroll, et al. (Feb. 2020) also debunked 

the onslaught of social media news flows and showed their solidarity with health professionals and 

scientists in China by referring to clinical studies completed by other scientists on the coronavirus.  

Undoubtedly, public debates on paid cable and social media platforms about the origins and reasons for 

the rapid spread of the virus have piqued people's curiosity and prompted more people than usual to 

seek and share news and rumors about the virus on a massive scale. Never before has the world 

community come together to help each other defeat the virus by sharing advice on remedies.  

3.7 How Media Influences Public Behavior on COVID-19 

To know how the media frames public opinion on COVID-19, we go back to 2009 when Swine flu or 

H1N1, was recorded as one of the worst global pandemics. When Swine flu or H1N1 became a 

pandemic, the media played a significant role in creating a lasting impression. According to Holland, 

K., Sweet, M., Blood, R., and Fogarty, A. (2014), media outlets across Australia were reporting data 

based on what they could find and understand. Viewers used updates from media reports to create more 

panic in the community. The World Health Organization did not verify the information the media was 

passing along.  

In terms of the coronavirus, ignorant people deprived of accurate information are susceptible to various 

forms of suffering. This is the case with minority groups experiencing economic hardship. In the 

United Kingdom, for example, 95% of the people infected or dying from the virus are ethnic minorities. 

According to the Reuters news agency, minorities who work in healthcare and other sectors are most 

exposed to the virus. The Public Health Journal in the United Kingdom affirms that ethnic minority 

groups are most affected because of their living standard. They have low incomes and large families 

living in compact areas; are obliged to work under high-risk conditions to support their families. Other 

vulnerable people in the UK and the US are blacks and the Hispanic workforce in big cities and 

construction workers.  

In the next segment, we attempt to show how the media controls public discourse on the coronavirus, 

literarily making people to operate in a “new normal” environment.  

3.8 COVID-19 and the “New Normal” Lifestyle 

Coronavirus has transformed how primary care physicians handle patient visits. When the World 

Health Organization, February 2020, announced COVID-19 as a worldwide pandemic, governments 

enforced social distancing to slow the spread of the virus, while medical experts from Harvard, Johns 

Hopkins, and the Center for Disease Control struggled to find a proper vaccine. Health experts, 

celebrities and other public figures, including parliamentarians and heads of state speaking on different 

media platforms in major world languages (French, English, Spanish, German, Portuguese, Mandarin, 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
60 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Kiswahili) have joined scientists in instructing people to wear face masks and gloves, wash their hands, 

stay six feet apart, and avoid large gatherings in public. Shopping centers, clinics, worship buildings, 

petrol filling stations, and other public places remind people to apply socially distance measures to 

protect themselves and others. This new public order is not a law in any country, but it has impacted 

certain customs. 

Further, family members and acquaintants are prohibited from visiting elderly patients in residential 

areas created for older people. Gyms have posted rules on their websites that include keeping people 

and machines at least six feet apart. Similarly, primary healthcare centers have introduced new ways of 

treating their patients. Formally, the patient would call and schedule an appointment, and the doctor 

would see, feel, and touch the patient.  

In the wake of the pandemic, some doctors offer remedies through videoconferencing, reducing the risk 

of getting infected. The table below shows the advantages and disadvantages of what this paper calls 

“cyber doctoring.” 

 

Table 3. COVID-induced Primary Care Patient Visit 
Activity Advantage  Disadvantage  

HIPPA  Offers a new, creative way of 

seeing patients  

Patient privacy may be easily 

compromised. Not all patients have access 

to internet/cyber doctor visits 

Cost  The patient's cost of an office 

visit is minimal. With only a 

video-equipped cell phone the 

patient can see a doctor and get 

treatment 

Clinics lose income when there is no 

in-person/office visit 

Patient Diagnosis  Doctors can treat the patient from 

afar 

The doctor can’t get a full diagnosis by 

speaking to the patient. A patient may be 

deaf, have low expressive skills, etc. 

preventing a thorough understanding of the 

health problem 

Satellite diagnosis The patient feels safe as no else is 

in the office knows his/her 

ailment-privacy protected 

Potential for misdiagnosing of health 

condition is greater 

 Good chance to experience the 

doctor’s human side. The doctor 

can show more compassion via 

Human emotions may not be sufficient. 

Satellite visits are limited to a phone 

conversation. 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
61 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

video meeting  Patients in impoverished areas may not 

have Internet 

Business 

sustainability 

In-person visits which often 

include lab tests, mammograms, 

EKGs bring more capital to run 

the clinic as a business 

-Smaller clinics may go out of business 

due to no in-person visits.  

 

3.8.1 The Advantages of Social Networking and Africa’s Sustenance Potential 

Networked groups have been vividly engaged in sharing, receiving, and processing stories about 

Covid-19. Vulnerable populations, that is, people without adequate access to social media information 

and those being directed by their governments, are more likely to be infected than those in open 

societies with frequent access to news and information about Covid-19. 

According to news reports from Agence France Presse published in May 2020, only 72,000 cases were 

recorded in Africa. This is significant in that Africa’s population accounts for 17 % of the world's 

population. Most Africans believe in traditional methods of living, and they rely on herbal treatments 

and related ancestral relics. Other reasons why Africa has contained the pandemic are indicated below: 

• Africa is outside the pathway of the heavily infected regions like China, the U.S., and the U.K., 

although Chinese citizens continue to travel to Africa and vice-versa. 

• Studies show that the virus does not survive for a long time in hot temperatures. We know that 

Africa is very hot. And global warming has made the continent hotter than ever. 

• Most African countries implemented the WHO measures as soon as the first cases were detected.  

• 65% of Africa’s population consists of young people, and the virus is affecting mostly older 

people with underlying problems. 

• Africa is mostly rural- communities are adept at using herbal remedies. Through messages shared 

on social media platforms, more people are boiling and drinking fever grass, lemon, orange, 

ginger, and other roots to slow or prevent infection. 

• According to Omar Sarr, a Professor of Medicine at the respected University of Cheikh Anta 

Diop in Dakar, Africa has been exposed to micro-organisms compared to other regions. 

Further, there is a high degree of vaccine coverage in Africa, making Africans potentially more 

resistant to contamination (www.linkedIn.com Retrieved May 18, 2020).  

• Madagascar and Cameroon have invented curative treatments against the virus. Medical 

professionals in Cameroon offer Kledavid, also known as Seraphine Kene, to COVID patients. 

In Madagascar, Doctors without Borders admitted that people were drinking boiled herbs and 

eating lemons and ginger as remedies for the disease. While there are no clinical studies to 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
62 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

support their claims, social media reports and online postings indicate those remedies have 

cleared symptoms in patients.  
3.8.2 Obstacles 

• Africa and India are densely populated, and people cannot practice social distancing, making 

them vulnerable to the virus.  

• Social norms such as handshaking, close contacts during funerals, and childbirth celebrations 

make it easier for the virus to spread among people. 

• Social Distancing, touted and promoted on cable media as the key preventive element against the 

spread of the virus, is a luxury to densely populated regions where most people are poor and 

cannot afford the financial costs.  

• Relaxed government regulations, such as allowing vehicles to deliver goods and opening bars. 

• Limited capacity and the will to sustain WHO guidelines. For example, Chinese and French 

airline companies were allowed to fly to Central and Southern Africa only two months after 

the WHO advised nations to close their borders. The African authorities probably allowed the 

planes to fly, fearing retribution from their allies.  

• Scientists may use the media as the bully pulpit to dissuade the masses in Africa from using local 

remedies to cure themselves. The colonial mentality is still entrenched in the African psyche 

so much that people cherish ‘foreign’ activities more than local initiatives. Some medical staff, 

hospitals, and clinics would rather wait for a vaccine or drug from Europe or America than 

administer local remedies such as Kledavid. 

 

4. Conclusions 

Covid-19 has caused dramatic deaths and illnesses, disrupted the global economy, and, most 

importantly, raised new challenges for globalization. From a sociological perspective, a more limited 

form of globalization might emerge, mitigated by the pandemic. While scientists and governments are 

working frenetically to limit the socio-economic and cultural impact of the epidemic on the human 

population, we have learned that the so-called superpowers—US, China, France, Russia, the UK, 

Germany, and Japan albeit renown for their economic and military prowess are gravely limited when it 

comes to managing a global health crisis. The high number of infections and deaths from Covid-19 

around the world shows that the most economically advanced countries were not prepared to stop the 

virus from spreading. The risks lie in our overdependence on world superpowers for our protection, 

which is a colossal mistake.  The whole experience with Covid-19 prompts us to reassess international 

interdependence and redefine the term ‘superpower.’  

Also, the World Health Organization mandated by United Nations to spearhead public Health failed to 

promptly inform nations about the deadly virus until it became a pandemic, exposing people to more 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
63 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

health crises and causing harm, especially among poor people and those living in squalid conditions all 

over the world.  

In short, the information gap and misunderstanding of what constitutes a superpower may have led to 

the mystification of Covid-19. Further, human beings do not automatically adjust to a brand new way 

of living, so they may soon abandon the so-called “new normal” of wearing masks in public and 

cleaning objects. Apathy, malaise, and sheer forgetfulness would cause people to return to old ways. 

Therefore, it is essential to consider some sociological solutions to the status quo.  

 

5. The Way forward 

5.1 Use of Social Media to Diagnose and Treat Patients 

Clinical psychologists, pharmacologists, and serological workers in each ethnic group should record 

video messages on different prevention measures, show people how to use traditional concoctions, and 

disseminate them via social media networks. Within days the messages would go viral, allowing people 

to analyze data and consider their options. The mysterious nature in which the coronavirus spreads has 

led healthcare institutions in some countries to apply new initiatives to limit its ability to infect more 

people. Social media has been found to affect the healthcare professional and patient relationship, by 

leading to regular communication between the patient and healthcare professional, increased switching 

of doctors, harmonious relationships, and suboptimal interaction between the patient and healthcare 

professional (Smailhodzic et al., 2016, p. 442). Concerned that the traditional approach to treating 

patients (physical contact) may spread the virus, clinics in the United States have resorted to social 

media, particularly Zoom and online registration portals, to see and treat patients, thereby fostering the 

spirit of social distancing. Early results show that cyber-treatment methods are not only practical, but 

they also do not compromise the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA) 

that requires the protection and confidential handling of protected health information. All patients 

electronically sign a document to keep their healthcare records confidential or relinquish that right.  

Novant Health, a healthcare provider based in North Carolina comprising a four-state integrated 

network of physician clinics, outpatient centers, hospitals, 1,600 physicians, 29,000 employees at 640 

locations, 15 medical centers and physician clinics has successfully diagnosed and treated over one 

million patients online since the state of North Carolina imposed lockdown due to the pandemic. This 

proves that healthcare organs and patients consider social media a useful partner needed to manage 

Covid-19. 

There may be more beneficial and potentially harmful effects of social media use to diagnose and treat 

coronavirus patients. However, it is probably too early to determine the effect of identifying and 

treating patients through video-based diagnoses until scientists carry out more clinical studies and 

reports from clinics over time. From a sociological perspective, it would be challenging to monitor 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
64 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

doctor-patient confidentiality since countries have their value system and healthcare laws. Patient 

privacy could be compromised if more countries do not set up privacy laws.  

5.2 Implications for Ethical Journalism 

Two significant problems identified from our analyses relate to information consumption; (1) that 

consumers do not take time to differentiate fake news sources from real news sources. As such, (2) 

consumers remain under-informed or misinformed—precarious, especially when there are millions of 

android phones in the world, and news reaches millions of people in only seconds. The fact the deadly 

virus spreads faster than information shared on social media platforms should incentivize established 

world media bodies to brainstorm creative ways of delivering accurate, useful messages to save lives. 

The burden of serving the human population with helpful information does not rest with social media 

CEOs like Mark Zuckerberg, John Legerr, Daniel Schulman, and other cohorts. Nor should we blame 

yellow journalism and rumor initiators for the fake news pandemic that has adulterated journalistic 

integrity is rendering the news and information industry more obsolete, obfuscating the management of 

useful information, and, in general, negatively affecting the media industry. 

Governments, international organizations, foreign services departments that conduct business with 

local and external partners, and established news organizations should collectively take steps to protect 

journalistic ethics. The obstacles facing the news team consisting of journalists, news anchors, camera 

operators, editors, graphic artists, photographers, informants that work together to complete a story 

require more training in spotting fake news. Training must include acquiring knowledge of every new 

technology, enhancing writing skills, and recognizing fake news typology.  

News industries need additional resources to train news teams to properly play the news media 

gatekeeper role that includes knowing news impact, prominence, proximity, bizarreness, conflict and 

currency, and the number of people to be influenced by the subject.  

If media organs want to enhance their reputation as the news reference point, they should raise fake 

news education and literacy levels within their ranks. If they used reverse search engines, and 

fact-checking sites to screen fake news and redistribute news promptly, the media organs would 

become authoritative contacts for confirming the authenticity of the story, hence re-establishing public 

trust.  

5.3 Consumer Responsibility 

It is difficult to distinguish between fake news and real news, especially after Facebook and Google 

employees tasked with banning offensive content face reprieve due to evolving policies imposed by the 

government. Even in the United States where the Constitution (The First Amendment) gives people five 

fundamental freedoms: Freedom of speech, press, petition, assembly and religion, such privileges are 

compromised when the U.S. President, Donald Trump,  signs an executive order giving tech 

companies, particularly Facebook, Twitter, and Google broad legal immunity over content posted by 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
65 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

their users. According to The National Law Review the  

“Order further directs federal agencies to assess their spending on advertising and marketing 

on online platforms, as well as directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to consider 

enforcement actions against social media companies for possible violations of Section 5 of the 

Federal Trade Commission Act” (The National Law Review, June 3, 2020).  

That decision overrides Section 230 of the Communication Decency Act that broadly protects internet 

companies from liability for the content users post on their platforms. The decision strips liability 

protection from companies that censure content. This means that social media news and information 

consumers would become more vulnerable to fake news. However, consumers must not trust any news 

or information from anonymous sources. They must take responsibility by identifying fake news to 

avoid being misled and consequently making the wrong decisions, especially as news about the 

Covid-19 pandemic has been spreading without a filtering, monitoring mechanism to educate 

vulnerable populations. News consumers should take the following steps to debunk fake news: 

• If you (the news consumer) are not sure informing is accurate, do not share it. 

• Check the date the story was published, for social media tends to recycle old stories. 

• Question news headlines written in capital letters or sentences filled with caesuras. 

• Question stories that quote other news outlets, especially websites, as their source. 

• If there are no links or ways to verify quotes and references, the news is likely fake.  

• Pay attention to the language of the news media. Zimdars (2020) has a list of ten steps needed to 

analyze false, misleading, clickbait-y, or satirical "news" sources. They include paying 

attention to the language the cable news media uses: "We are seeking confirmation, "or "We 

are getting reports that..," or (name of news network) has learned." Unless there is live 

reporting and viewers see actual photos and assess what informants are sharing, the news is 

likely fake.  

• Choose news from outlets close to the incident, not media from afar, and compare multiple 

sources. 

• Beware of messages that overtly and ironically reflect conventions. Messages tweeted and 

retweeted that use more adjectives and action verbs are likely fake.  

• The Center for News Literacy warns that 'big news brings out fakers and photo shoppers.'  

• A news article with too many ads such as pop-ups and banner ads might be fake. 

• Newsmongers should access https://guides.stlcc.edu/fakenews/factchecking  

• Most important, follow the rules provided by the World Health Organization to prevent the 

spread of the virus that includes avoiding crowds, washing hands, wearing masks, and keeping 

a six-feet distance in public. 
• Newsmongers should access https://guides.stlcc.edu/fakenews/factchecking. 

https://guides.stlcc.edu/fakenews/factchecking
https://guides.stlcc.edu/fakenews/factchecking


www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
66 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

5.4 Suggestions for Country Policymakers 

We advise policymakers to take the following measures immediately based on each country’s 

governing style, resources, international socio-economic relations, and diplomatic relations with its 

partners: 

• Government heads (directors/ministers of healthcare) should update their population about the 

pandemic. 

• Administrators should have a program for reopening the economy based on informed advice 

from top-notch scientists in their country and the WHO.  

• Governments should set up a crisis intervention team of scientists, healthcare workers, media 

organs, and demographers to trace the spread of the virus and use trial medications such as 

dexamethasone or chloroquine only when it has been cleared globally as a safe form of 

treatment.  

• Governments should liaise with international experts through diplomatic channels to compare 

experiences, share facts about it and treatment measures, and pick out best practices in finding 

a cure. 

• Governments should find volunteers to share literature about the virus in their communities. 

• Each government should invest in local herbalists, medical doctors, and serologists to seek 

remedial treatment and eventually find a cure because relying heavily on foreign intelligence 

could compromise a country’s political, diplomatic, and economic interests.  

5.5 Making a Case for Media Buying by the Most Vulnerable Groups 

It is well established that mainstream news media are corporate-owned. Mainstream right-wing media 

organs frame news to meet the needs of their owners, so news editors influence public opinion by 

choosing stories and building narratives that make headlines and front pages of newspapers. They 

select news based on their perceptions of big straight news and their political, economic, diplomatic, 

and cultural impact on the consumer. Simply put, the news we get is the outcome of professional 

routines that generally focus on the activities of bureaucratic institutions. David Croteau and William 

Hoynes (2003) and Ronald L. Jackson, past President of the National Communication Association 

(U.S.), among others prove the point that the media is a powerful tool used to control minds and the 

economy. Jackson (2019) sees the media as "our portals to knowledge and information across the 

globe," and information as something steeped in the political, socio-economic, communal, cultural, and 

communicative complexities of the convergence media that bring us the stories about other worlds (p. 

v).  

In terms of resource mobilization, say in the United States, Blacks are the most ignored group; 

therefore, they must first understand that the media's partial coverage of the coronavirus pandemic 

might be the reason for widespread infection and high death rates in their community. Thus, those who 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
67 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

have been misinformed about Covid-19 should create their media platforms to screen information and 

share their messages to manage the pandemic instead of relying on mainstream media, which is 

sponsored by powerful political and wealthy entities. For Blacks to control content about the epidemic 

and related economic matters in the distant future, they should buy and own more radio and television 

stations now. The fact that Blacks own only 10 of 12,000 cable news television stations is a case in 

point. In Africa and other countries where Blacks are the majority population, media broadcasts tend to 

favor Western socio-economic interests that are generally detrimental to them.  

Grosso modo, the propensity to create and share news to millions of people, lies in a group’s ability to 

control its economy. No matter which perspective aligns with those of a particular community, what 

matters is how a community manages the media content it receives. Communities that sheepishly 

consume information from other media sources lack political and economic influence—they do not 

have control over policy and financial markets in their community or elsewhere. For example, the 

Black population, which has approximately two billion of the world’s population of 7.7 billion, needs 

to change the global political landscape to recognize its digital presence in the world. The 46 million 

Blacks in the United States (14%) of the country’s population (of 331 million) could form their political 

party and put together a healthcare plan detailing how they want to be served. As such, any political 

party, Republican or Democrat, would ensure that their platform is included in the nation’s agenda. 

Consequently, U.S. media, which delivers news content based on the overarching interests of the 

Republican or Democrat ideology, would add the Black community's plan to its reporting program. If 

Blacks do not own more media stations to carry their messages, they cannot control the influx of 

information from other sources in their community. 

 

References 

Adesina, O. S. & James, S. (Eds.). (2017). Foreign policy in an era of digital diplomacy. Cogent Social 

Sciences, 3(1). 

Allport, G. W., & Postman, L. (1947). The psychology of rumor. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston. 

Anderson, M., & Chaumont, A. (2014). How social media is reshaping news. Pew Research Center. 

Calisher, C., & Carroll, D. et al. (March 7, 2020). Statement in support of the scientists, public health 

professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19. The Lancet, 395, 10226, 

E43. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7159294/ Retrieved May 30, 

2020 

Cook, J., Lewandowsky, S., & Ecker, U. K. (2017). Neutralizing misinformation through inoculation: 

Exposing misleading argumentation techniques reduces their influence. PloS one, 12 (5), 

e0175799. 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
68 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Dorfman, L., & Krasnow, I. D. (2013). Public health and media advocacy. Annual Review of Public 

Health, 35, 293-306. 

Fazio, L., & Brashia, N. et al. (2015). Knowledge Does Not Protect Against Illusory Truth. Journal of 

Experimental Psychology American Psychological Association, 144 (5), 993-1002. 

Gordon, J., Deines, T., & Havice, J. (2010). Global Warming Coverage in the Media: Trends in a 

Mexico City Newspaper. Science Communication, 32 (2), 143-170. 

Hambrick, Z. D., & Marquardt, M. (February 6, 2018). Cognitive Ability and Vulnerability to Fake 

News. Retrieved June 13, 2020, from 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/cognitive-ability-and-vulnerability-to-fake-news  

Holland, K., Sweet, M., Blood, R., & Fogarty, A. (2014). A legacy of the swine flu global pandemic: 

Journalists, expert sources, and conflicts of interest. Journalism, 15(1), 53-71. 

Jackson, L. R. (2019) Foreword. In Emmanuel K. Ngwainmbi (Ed.), Media in the Global Context: 

Applications and Inventions (pp. v-ix.). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. 

Lardieri, A. (May 20, 2020). Older People More Susceptible to Fake News, more likely to share it. 

Retrieved May 20, 2020, from https://www.usnews.com 

Lewandowsky, S., & Cook, J. (2020). The Conspiracy Theory Handbook. Tasmania, Australia: The 

University of Western Australia. 

Livio, M. (2017). Why? What makes is curious. New York: Simon and Schuster. 

Melissen, J. (2013). Public diplomacy. In A. Cooper, J. Heine, & R. Thakur (Eds.), The Oxford 

handbook of modern diplomacy (pp. 436-452). Oxford: Oxford University Press. 

Mooney, A. L., Knox, D., & Schacht, C. (2007). Understanding Social Problems (5th Ed.). Wadsworth 

Publishing Company. 

Mutugi, J. K., Nyamboga, N., & Matu, N. (2020). Challenges Facing Television Journalists in Spotting 

Fake News in Kenya. Journal of Development and Communication Studies. In Press.  

Ngwainmbi, E. K. (2019). Fake news reporting on social media platforms and implications for nation 

state-building. In E. K. Ngwainmbi (Ed.), Media in the Global Context: Applications and 

Inventions (pp. 95-127). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.  

Pan, Z. D. & Kosicki, M. G. (1993). Framing analysis: An Approach to news discourse. Journal of 

Political Communication, 10(1), 55-75. 

Smailhodzic, E., Hooijsma, W., Boonstra, A., Langley, D. (August 2016) Social media use in healthcare: 

A systematic review of effects on patients and their relationship with healthcare professionals. In 

BMC Health Service Research, 16(1), 442. 

The Washington Post. (May 28, 2020). Retrieved May 28, 2020, from https://theverge.com 

 

 



www.scholink.org/ojs/index.php/csm               Communication, Society and Media                Vol. 3, No. 3, 2020 

 

 
69 

Published by SCHOLINK INC. 

 

Note 

Note 1. World Health Organization, www.who.int. The figures vary on different websites. 


