Handling og usikkerhet. Norske myndigheters kommunikasjon om svineinfluensapandemien i 2009.

Abstract

I artikkelen undersøker vi sentrale norske myndigheters håndtering av H1N1-pandemien i 2009, med vekt på den eksterne kommunikasjonshåndteringen. Vi viser hvordan myndighetenes kommunikasjon utad ble formet gjennom samvirket mellom politisk lederskap, forvaltningsmyndighet og faglig kyndighet. Et sentralt mål i myndighetenes kommunikasjonsstrategi var å snakke med én stemme og sikre et enhetlig og klart budskap utad. Men balansen mellom åpenhet om usikkerhet om pandemiens videre utvikling og behovet for handling og iverksetting av tiltak, var en kilde til uenighet internt. Vår analyse indikerer likevel at nettopp differensieringen mellom de ulike myndighetsaktørene, og klarhet om rollefordelingen mellom dem også i den utadrettede kommunikasjonen, kan vaere av vesentlig betydning for en vellykket krisekommunikasjon.

When Authority Goes Viral: Digital Communication and Health Expertise on pandemi.no

“…Prior to the 2009 pandemic, the Norwegian authorities had had several unfortunate encounters with mass media over its response to crises-including the 2004 tsunami and a more recent episode where the estimated number of fatalities from a future pandemic was made frontpage news. Top health bureaucrats in the Ministry of Health and Care Services had been working hard to get on top of the situation before the revised version of the preparedness plans appeared in 2006, and pandemi.no was one measure they thought could help them avoid the mistakes of the past (see Brekke et al 2017).…”

“…For while the impression one gets from the site is that of one unified voice, emanating from an impersonal collective of medical and public health experts, there were actually several cases of medical experts speaking out against the authorities' handling of the pandemic. For one, the two responsible agencies, The Directorate of Health and the Institute of Public Health, did not see eye to eye in every particular; many at the research-oriented Institute felt that the administration-oriented Directorate was taking a too dramatic, too proactive stance (Brekke et al 2017). Such disagreements within the ranks of medical experts also reached the public sphere on a number of occasions: For example, professor of social medicine, Per Fugelli, wrote an op-ed in August 2009 where he stated that "there are signs that the NIPH and the Directorate are trying to 'crush the rebellion' [people not wanting to get the flu shot] by help of bogeymen, threats and moralizing," and argued that the health authorities should instead take a more "democratic" approach (Fugelli 2009).…”