Somebody to Blame: On the Construction of the Other in the Context of the Covid-19 Outbreak

Abstract

Besides the impact that COVID-19 has had in the sanitary, political and economic domains, it has also triggered multiple discursive processes, what opens up the field for an analysis from sociosemiotics, the social science interested in the study of ‘meaning in action’. The aim of this article is to discuss from such a perspective how the current crisis linked to the COVID-19 virus has given place to the emergence of processes of narrative construction of an ‘Other’ to be blamed for the threat. While in some contexts the dominant narrative has been that COVID-19 is ‘the Chinese’ –and their unhealthy culinary habits– fault, in others the focus has been set on ‘the irresponsible’ that do not stay home when indicated to do so, as well as on ‘the posh’, given that they can afford travelling and hence can import the virus on their return. Departing from the premise which poses that cognition is articulated in narrative terms, the article argues how, in cases such as the current COVID-19 crisis, a discursive construction of collective actors by means of mechanisms of actorialization, generalization and axiologization is necessary for the dynamics of blame-attribution.

SARS-CoV-2 and Asbestos Exposure: Can Our Experience With Mesothelioma Patients Help Us Understand the Psychological Consequences of COVID-19 and Develop Interventions?

“…This can include scientific laboratories, China, 5G, governments, the healthcare system, God, or even other people who do not behave as they think appropriate for containing the spread of the virus. In this context, myths and misconceptions ("fake news") about COVID-19 have emerged especially on the internet, which has fueled anxiety among people (Barreneche, 2020) There are important similarities and differences between MM and COVID-19 in terms of the affected populations and disease onset time. The interval from exposure to asbestos to the development of symptoms in MM is on average ≥ 40 years; as such, this cancer mainly occurs in adults and older people (Marinaccio et al, 2007;Barone-Adesi et al, 2012;Reid et al, 2014).…”

“…This can include scientific laboratories, China, 5G, governments, the healthcare system, God, or even other people who do not behave as they think appropriate for containing the spread of the virus. In this context, myths and misconceptions (“fake news”) about COVID-19 have emerged especially on the internet, which has fueled anxiety among people ( Barreneche, 2020 ), forcing national and international public health agencies to counter the propagation of misinformation by refuting false claims and communicating correct information ( Italian Ministry of Health [IMH], 2020 ; Istituto Superiore di Sanità [ISS], 2020b ; World Health Organization [WHO], 2020a , b ).…”

The Heroes of the Pandemic: The Discursive Construction of the Healthcare Workers Collective during the COVID-19 Crisis

“…Otro de los fenómenos de naturaleza discursiva asociados a la pandemia del COVID-19 estuvo relacionado con la construcción y el empleo, a nivel discursivo, de ciertas narrativas e imaginarios vinculados con una serie de actores colectivos involucrados, de alguna manera, en la trama de la pandemia, especialmente en lo que refiere al procesos de atribución de culpa dentro del marco más amplio de atribución de sentido a una situación inédita que se presentó como una amenaza a la normalidad y al status quo (Moreno-Barreneche, 2020b). Así, en primer lugar, la categoría de sentido los chinos fue empleada como forma de atribuir responsabili-dad a una cultura en su totalidad por la propagación del virus.…”

The COVID-19 Contagion–Pandemic Dyad: A View from Social Sciences

“…The vast majority of countries [9][10][11] have imposed a set of preventive procedures and devices, in addition to medical tests, based on isolation, quarantine, community containment and physical distancing [12,13], travel restrictions, hand hygiene and the banning of events and gatherings. These measures have led to the temporary closure of several economic and social institutions, a relative national lockdown in several countries and enormous pressure on health systems [12,[14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][22][23]. However, countries such as Sweden, South Korea and Taiwan did not impose total containment but followed a strategy that articulated quarantine targeting risk groups, monitoring, and large-scale testing, together with social distancing measures (even the use of masks).…”