Media coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Media coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic has varied by country, time period and media outlet. News media has simultaneously kept viewers informed about current events related to the pandemic, and contributed to misinformation or fake news.

COVID-19 pandemic[edit]

COVID-19 is a disease caused by a virus called SARS-CoV-2.[1] Most people who contract COVID experience mild symptoms whereas others become severely ill.[1] Elderly people and those with certain underlying medical conditions are more likely to get severely ill. There are currently four vaccines available in the United States to help prevent COVID-19: Pfizer, Moderna, Novavax, and Johnson & Johnson.[2] They are known to be safe, effective, and reduce the risk of severe illness. The virus spreads when an infected person breathes out droplets and very small particles that contain the virus.[1]

Media coverage in the United States[edit]

The COVID-19 pandemic has opened a new door for social media and mental health in ways that have never existed before. Mental health is at the forefront because it has been so severely impacted by the pandemic. People who were already suffering with mental health issues is being exacerbated by the isolation. Social media has not been covered as much even though it plays such an important role whether it comes from a positive or negative light. People were able to find online communities to help them during the isolation, but it also was negative because it made people feel more separated from everyone around them. It also does not help because everyone is so invested in their social media that they forget to communicate with the humans around them in person. The COVID-19 pandemic has also been associated with mental health challenges for those who are not infected with it, including the social and economic impacts of quarantine, physical distancing, stay-at-home orders, gathering bans, nonessential business closures, and additional measures introduced to reduce community transmission of the virus.[3] Challenges for mental health associated with COVID-19 may arise via either indirect experiences with the virus (e.g., bereavement; social isolation and loneliness; uncertainty; socioeconomic distress) or from personal infection.[3] A number of media outlets have specifically covered deaths of anti-vaccine advocates from COVID-19,[4][5][6][7][8] leading to disputes over the propriety of such coverage.[9][10][11][12][13]

Level and nature of coverage[edit]

The (COVID-19) pandemic has put a tremendous strain on many countries' citizens, resources, and economies around the world.[14] This includes the social distancing measures, travel bans, self-quarantines, and business closures are changing the very fabric of societies worldwide.[14] With people forced out of public spaces, much of the conversation about this pandemic and the after effects now occurs online and on social media platforms.[citation needed]

Within January 2020, the first full month in which the outbreak was known, Time recorded 41,000 English-language articles containing the term "coronavirus", of which 19,000 made it to headlines. This was compared with the Kivu Ebola epidemic, which had 1,800 articles and 700 headlines in August 2018. Paul Levinson, a researcher in communications and media studies, attributed this wide disparity to backlash from perceived overcoverage of the 2014 Ebola outbreak, coupled with concerns regarding Chinese censorship of the coverage.[15]

Recode reported on 17 March that, out of 3,000 high-traffic news sites, around 1 percent of published articles are related to the disease, but those articles generate around 13 percent of all views, with subtopics such as social distancing, flattening the curve and self-quarantine being particularly popular. The total number of article views itself was some 30 percent higher in mid-March 2020 compared to in mid-March 2019.[16]

An analysis of approximately 141,000 English language news headlines related to the Coronavirus from January 15, 2020, to June 3, 2020, uncovered that 52% of headlines evoked negative sentiments while only 30% evoked positive sentiments.[17] The authors suggest that the headlines are contributing to fear and uncertainty which is having negative health and economic outcomes. Other studies in different contexts and focused in different media have found that news have not portrayed coping strategies and health behaviors as much as they could have.[18][19] Other authors suggest that news coverage has resulted in the politicization of the pandemic,[20] has been excessively concerned for the performance of political actors over the provision of scientific and self-efficacy information,[19] and has been highly polarized.[21]

A November 2020 paper from the National Bureau of Economic Research titled "Why Is All COVID-19 News Bad News?" found that 91% of stories by major American media outlets about COVID-19 have a negative tone compared to 54% for major media outlets outside the United States and 65% for scientific journals.[22]

Issues with misinformation and fake news led to the development of CoVerifi, a platform that has the potential to help address the COVID-19 "infodemic".[23]

It has been claimed that the extended and prolonged coverage of the pandemic may have contributed to a COVID-19 information fatigue, making it more difficult to communicate updated information.[24] Media experts say the challenge for some news outlets is accurately conveying the nuance of pandemic science to the public.[25] The public who are now being  asked to resume mask wearing in some parts of the country and as the delta variant sends cases soaring among the unvaccinated.[25]


In January 2020, the World Health Organization declared that an "infodemic" of false information was helping the virus propagate. Academics were quick to document the spread of fake news and other disinformation and theorize it within particular national and transcultural contexts and trends (such as "post-truth politics").[26][27][28] The number of outlets and entities, from traditional journalism to social media, covering the COVID-19 pandemic will surely prove to have been a source of misinformation and confusion related to virus spread information and national and state policies. Dr. Sylvie Briand, Director of Global Infectious Hazards Preparedness Department of the World Health Organization, mentioned that one of the major concerns related to communication challenges is the role of social media. Briand stated that the WHO is carefully monitoring the coronavirus infodemic on social media utilizing artificial intelligence.[29] According to Pew Research Center the most popular sources of news for adults in the United States include news websites and social media.[30] Also, Twitter is recorded as having the highest number of news focused users among other social media outlets[31] Romanian scholar Sofia Bratu[32] conducted a study which considered individuals’ perception of the source of fake news by surveying nearly 5000 U.S. citizens and  analyzing data from The Economist, Gallup, Pew Research Center, YouGov, among other reputable survey organizations. Scholars suggest that misinformation is to blame for escalated stress reactions, physical and mental health declines related to stress, and increased burden on healthcare facilities with patients who are not truly exhibiting symptoms or are exhibiting symptoms as an adverse reaction to false cures and treatments.[32][33] However, Brafu[32] does mention that televised interviews with COVID-19 survivors may in fact assist in alleviating stress, panic, and fear of death.

Others argue that newsrooms should play a role in filtering misinformation before ‘giving it oxygen’.[34] While not all fake news is putting the health and safety of the people at risk, information related to COVID-19 could. Niemen Reports suggests that newsrooms should be working collaboratively to deliver consistent messages related to false and inaccurate information by choosing headlines, wording, and images carefully.[citation needed]

An example of fake news related to the COVID-19 pandemic was that the virus could be spread via 5G.[35] Another, that the virus was manually created in a lab by government leaders[36][37] or that consuming chlorine dioxide would treat or prevent the virus.[38] Other viral pieces of misinformation include that Vitamin C and garlic could cure the virus even though this claim was never substantiated by health professionals.[36] Misinformation has also led to racial discrimination and displays of xenophobia toward Chinese individuals through the referral of the disease as the "Chinese virus pandemonium"[39] or "Wuhan Virus" or "China Virus".[40] As a result of this misinformation several fact checking websites have appeared which utilize information from the CDC and WHO to debunk common viral information.[41][42][43]

By country[edit]


The first confirmed case of COVID-19, as reported by the Canadian Healthcare Network, was January 25, 2020 in a Toronto man who had recently traveled to Wuhan, China.[44] The first case was announced on Toronto Public Health Officials' Twitter account.[45]


The Chinese government has received significant criticism for its censoring of the extent of the outbreak. Immediately following the initial quarantine of Wuhan and nearby cities, Chinese state media such as the People's Daily initially encouraged social media posts seeking help between citizens on platforms such as Weibo.[46] Multiple journalists then published investigative pieces contradicting official statements and media, indicating that the number of cases in Wuhan is significantly larger than is reported.[47]


The first cases of COVID-19 were identified in Germany in January 2020.[48] Controversy erupted over a January 2021 article published by the German newspaper Handelsblatt.[citation needed] The article stated that the AstraZeneca vaccine was not effective for older adults,[49] but many responded saying the newspaper provided incorrect data.[50]


Studies on the media framing of COVID-19 in Mexico claim newscasts and newspapers focused on the political side of the pandemic rather than on providing scientific and self-efficacy information.[19] Television was the medium most used by Mexicans for getting information about COVID-19.[51] Heavy social media users were more likely to believe in fake news, and to distrust media.[51]


The first case of COVID-19 was identified in Sweden on February 4, 2020.[52] The most media coverage of Sweden occurred in early March.[52] Sweden received a great deal of media attention because it was considered to be using its own plan, the 'Swedish Model' of herd immunity. Research has looked at the nature of media coverage and how Swedish policy was covered by the news media. Rachel Irwin, a researcher from Sweden, found there were six main themes: "(1) Life is normal in Sweden, (2) Sweden has a herd immunity strategy, (3) Sweden is not following expert advice, (4) Sweden is not following WHO recommendations (5) the Swedish approach is failing and (6) Swedes trust the government."[53] She comments that not all of the information was framed correctly. She wrote a letter to the British Medical Journal stating that media coverage has inaccurately portrayed the COVID-19 policies in Sweden and that it did not have a "herd immunity" plan.[54] Another article suggests that as other countries came up with different policies the Swedish policy model went from "bold to pariah".[55]

United Kingdom[edit]

The first confirmed case in the UK, as reported by GOV.UK, was January 30, 2020. In reporting about the outbreak, British tabloid newspapers such as The Sun and the Daily Mail used language described as "fear-inducing".[56] According to Edelman's Trust Barometer, journalists were the least-trusted source for information regarding the pandemic in the UK, with 43 percent out of the surveyed trusting them to report the truth, behind government officials (48%) and "most-affected countries" (46%). This was despite conventional media being the primary source of information regarding the pandemic in the UK.[57]

A study conducted in May 2020 in association with the University of Oxford showed that the UK public is exhibiting declining trust in the government as a source of information. Only 48% rated the government relatively trustworthy, which is down from 67% six weeks earlier. Moreover, 38% of people are stating that they are concerned false or misleading coronavirus information from the government, a figure which was only 27% six weeks earlier.[58]

United States[edit]

The first confirmed case in the United States, as reported by the CDC, was January 22, 2020.[59] News coverage in the U.S. has been more negative than in other countries,[60] but has also helped promote safety behaviors including social distancing.[61] Local news has played an important role in keeping communities informed, including in rural areas.[62]

Some journalists in the U.S. have been praised for their coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic including Ed Yong and Helen Branswell. Among media scholars, many elements of mainstream journalists' efforts to adapt to the pandemic and provide reliable information to their audience have been praised, but some have been criticized. Writing for The Atlantic, Ed Yong noted that, as the pandemic unfolded, "drawn to novelty, journalists gave oxygen to fringe anti-lockdown protests while most Americans quietly stayed home". He also faulted that they "wrote up every incremental scientific claim, even those that hadn’t been verified or peer-reviewed."[63]

President Donald Trump initially accused media outlets such as CNN of "doing everything they can to instill fear in people", a statement echoed by Acting White House Chief of Staff Mick Mulvaney.[64] Where people get their news has played an important role in people's attitudes and behaviors related to COVID-19.[65] An Axios survey, conducted from 5 March 2020 to 9 March, found that 62% of Republican supporters believed that the outbreak's coverage by media is exaggerated, compared to 31% of Democratic supporters and 35% of independents.[66] A Pew Research survey conducted from 20 April to 26 April found that 69% of U.S. respondents believed that the news media have covered the outbreak "very well" or "somewhat well" and that the number of U.S. respondents who believed the media have exaggerated COVID-19 risks had somewhat decreased.[67] The survey also found that 68% of Republican supporters believed that the news media exaggerated COVID-19 risks, compared to 48% of all U.S. adults and 30% of Democratic supporters.[67] Overall, coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic in the US was substantially more negative than in other parts of the world—regardless of whether the news outlet was considered right-leaning or left-leaning.[68][69][70][71][72] In hindsight, a study by Ángel Torres and collaborators on misinformation during the pandemic suggests that further progress is needed regarding the transparency of the verification process of independent third-party fact checkers.[73]

Opinion hosts and guests on Fox News, a conservative media outlet, initially downplayed the disease outbreak, with some guests accusing other media outlets of overplaying the disease for political reasons.[74] Trump also used interviews with the network to promote his early efforts to downplay the virus.[75][76] One Fox Business host, Trish Regan, claimed on her show Trish Regan Primetime that COVID-19 media coverage was deliberately created by the Democratic Party as a "mass hysteria to encourage a market sell-off", and was "yet another attempt to impeach the president". Her program would later be cancelled.[77] Tucker Carlson initially took a much more serious position regarding the disease, criticizing other hosts which compared it with ordinary seasonal flu, and stating on 9 March that "people you trust — people you probably voted for — have spent weeks minimizing what is clearly a very serious problem."[78][79][80] Later on, the network's pundits began to endorse claims that hydroxychloroquine was an effective treatment for COVID-19 symptoms,[81] criticize the wearing of face masks to control spread,[82][83][84] and provide positive coverage to anti-lockdown protests.[85][86]

According to study published by Cambridge University Press in May 2020, right-wing media coverage of COVID-19 helped facilitate the spread of misinformation about the pandemic.[87]

See also[edit]


  1. ^ a b c CDC (2020-02-11). "COVID-19 and Your Health". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 2021-12-12.
  2. ^ CDC (2022-12-09). "COVID-19 Vaccination". Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Retrieved 2022-12-19.
  3. ^ a b Czeisler, Mark É.; Howard, Mark E.; Rajaratnam, Shantha M. W. (February 2021). "Mental Health During the COVID-19 Pandemic: Challenges, Populations at Risk, Implications, and Opportunities". American Journal of Health Promotion. 35 (2): 301–311. doi:10.1177/0890117120983982b. ISSN 0890-1171. PMID 33554624. S2CID 231871553.
  4. ^ Ali, Shirin (December 2, 2021). "More and more conservative media leaders are dying from COVID-19 after advocating against vaccines". The Hill.
  5. ^ Farhi, Paul (September 1, 2021). "Four conservative radio talk-show hosts bashed coronavirus vaccines. Then they got sick". Washington Post. Archived from the original on September 1, 2021. Retrieved September 20, 2021.
  6. ^ Gabbatt, Adam (21 September 2021). "Dangerous transmissions: anti-vax radio shows reach millions in US while stars die of Covid". The Guardian. Archived from the original on 21 September 2021. Retrieved 22 September 2021.
  7. ^ "At least 7 conservative radio hosts and anti-mask advocates have died from COVID-19 after bashing the vaccines". Business Insider. September 14, 2021.
  8. ^ Politi, Daniel (August 29, 2021). "Marc Bernier Becomes Third Anti-Vax Radio Host to Die of COVID-19". Slate.
  9. ^ Judkis, Maura (October 7, 2021). "What do all these stories of vaccine denial deaths do to our sense of empathy?". The Washington Post.
  10. ^ Sicha, Choire (August 16, 2021). "How Mean Should We Be to Each Other?". Intelligencer. Retrieved September 5, 2021.
  11. ^ Levin, Dan (November 27, 2021). "They Died From Covid. Then the Online Attacks Started". The New York Times.
  12. ^ Hiltzik, Michael (January 10, 2022). "Column: Mocking anti-vaxxers' COVID deaths is ghoulish, yes — but may be necessary". Los Angeles Times.
  13. ^ Richman, Jackson (January 10, 2022). "LA Times Under Fire For Column on Mocking Deaths of Anti-Vaxxers". Mediaite.
  14. ^ a b Chen, Emily; Lerman, Kristina; Ferrara, Emilio (2020-04-10). "Tracking Social Media Discourse About the COVID-19 Pandemic: Development of a Public Coronavirus Twitter Data Set (Preprint)". doi:10.2196/preprints.19273. S2CID 243153003. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  15. ^ "How News Coverage of Coronavirus in 2020 Compares to Ebola in 2018". Time. 7 February 2020. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  16. ^ Molla, Rani (17 March 2020). "It's not just you. Everybody is reading the news more because of coronavirus". Recode. Vox Media. Retrieved 15 April 2020.
  17. ^ Aslam, Faheem; Awan, Tahir Mumtaz; Syed, Jabir Hussain; Kashif, Aisha; Parveen, Mahwish (2020-07-08). "Sentiments and emotions evoked by news headlines of coronavirus disease (COVID-19) outbreak". Humanities and Social Sciences Communications. 7 (1): 1–9. doi:10.1057/s41599-020-0523-3. ISSN 2662-9992. S2CID 220398688.
  18. ^ Basch, Corey H.; Hillyer, Grace Clarke; Erwin, Zoe Meleo-; Mohlman, Jan; Cosgrove, Alison; Quinones, Nasia (August 2020). "News coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic: Missed opportunities to promote health sustaining behaviors". Infection, Disease & Health. 25 (3): 205–209. doi:10.1016/j.idh.2020.05.001. PMC 7229940. PMID 32426559.
  19. ^ a b c Rodelo, F. V. (2021). "Framing of the Covid-19 pandemic and its organizational predictors". 50 (1): 91–112. doi:10.7764/cdi.50.37525. S2CID 240618285.
  20. ^ Abbas, Ali Haif (2020-07-03). "Politicizing the Pandemic: A Schemata Analysis of COVID-19 News in Two Selected Newspapers". International Journal for the Semiotics of Law - Revue internationale de Sémiotique juridique. 35 (3): 883–902. doi:10.1007/s11196-020-09745-2. ISSN 0952-8059. PMC 7332744. PMID 33214736.
  21. ^ Hart, P. Sol; Chinn, Sedona; Soroka, Stuart (October 2020). "Politicization and Polarization in COVID-19 News Coverage". Science Communication. 42 (5): 679–697. doi:10.1177/1075547020950735. ISSN 1075-5470. PMC 7447862.
  22. ^ Sacerdote, Bruce; Sehgal, Ranjan; Cook, Molly (2020-11-23). "Why Is All COVID-19 News Bad News?". National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.3386/w28110. S2CID 229469159.
  23. ^ Kolluri, Nikhil L.; Murthy, Dhiraj (March 2021). "CoVerifi: A COVID-19 news verification system". Online Social Networks and Media. 22: 100123. doi:10.1016/j.osnem.2021.100123. ISSN 2468-6964. PMC 7825993. PMID 33521412.
  24. ^ Skulmowski, Alexander; Standl, Bernhard (2021). "COVID-19 information fatigue? A case study of a German university website during two waves of the pandemic". Human Behavior and Emerging Technologies. 3 (3): 350–356. doi:10.1002/hbe2.260. PMC 8239648. PMID 34222832.
  25. ^ a b Homan, Timothy R. (2021-08-04). "White House voices frustrations over pandemic media coverage". TheHill. Retrieved 2021-12-12.
  26. ^ Harsin, Jayson (2020-12-01). "Toxic White masculinity, post-truth politics and the COVID-19 infodemic". European Journal of Cultural Studies. 23 (6): 1060–1068. doi:10.1177/1367549420944934. ISSN 1367-5494. S2CID 225426716.
  27. ^ Solomon, Daniel H.; Bucala, Richard; Kaplan, Mariana J.; Nigrovic, Peter A. (2020). "The "Infodemic" of COVID-19". Arthritis & Rheumatology. 72 (11): 1806–1808. doi:10.1002/art.41468. ISSN 2326-5205. PMC 7435516. PMID 32741134.
  28. ^ Richtel, Matt (2020-02-06). "W.H.O. Fights a Pandemic Besides Coronavirus: An 'Infodemic'". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-11-27.
  29. ^ "A Voice from the frontline: the role of risk communication in managing the COVID-19 Infodemic and engaging communities in pandemic response". Journal of Communication in Healthcare. 13 (1): 6–9. 2020-01-02. doi:10.1080/17538068.2020.1758427. ISSN 1753-8068. S2CID 221054943.
  30. ^ Jurkowitz, Mark; Mitchell, Amy; Shearer, Elisa; Walker, Mason (January 24, 2020). "U.S. Media Polarization and the 2020 Election: A Nation Divided". Pew Research Center's Journalism Project.
  31. ^ Sharma, Karishma; Seo, Sungyong; Meng, Chuizheng; Rambhatla, Sirisha; Liu, Yan (2020). "COVID-19 on social media: analyzing misinformation in Twitter conversations". arXiv:2003.12309 [cs.SI].
  32. ^ a b c "The Fake News Sociology of COVID-19 Pandemic Fear: Dangerously Inaccurate Beliefs, Emotional Contagion, and Conspiracy Ideation". Linguistic and Philosophical Investigations. 19: 128. 2020. doi:10.22381/lpi19202010. ISSN 1841-2394.
  33. ^ Garfin, Dana Rose; Silver, Roxane Cohen; Holman, E. Alison (May 2020). "The novel coronavirus (COVID-2019) outbreak: Amplification of public health consequences by media exposure". Health Psychology. 39 (5): 355–357. doi:10.1037/hea0000875. ISSN 1930-7810. PMC 7735659. PMID 32202824. S2CID 214629743.
  34. ^ "What Role Should Newsrooms Play in Debunking COVID-19 Misinformation?". Nieman Reports. Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  35. ^ Ahmed, Wasim; Vidal-Alaball, Josep; Downing, Joseph; Seguí, Francesc López (2020). "COVID-19 and the 5G Conspiracy Theory: Social Network Analysis of Twitter Data". Journal of Medical Internet Research. 22 (5): e19458. doi:10.2196/19458. PMC 7205032. PMID 32352383.
  36. ^ a b Mian, Areeb; Khan, Shujhat (2020-03-18). "Coronavirus: the spread of misinformation". BMC Medicine. 18 (1): 89. doi:10.1186/s12916-020-01556-3. ISSN 1741-7015. PMC 7081539. PMID 32188445.
  37. ^ "COVID: No, Coronavirus Wasn't Created in a Laboratory. Genetics Shows Why". American Council on Science and Health. 2020-09-15. Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  38. ^ Reimann, Nicholas. "Some Americans Are Tragically Still Drinking Bleach As A Coronavirus 'Cure'". Forbes. Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  39. ^ Wen, Jun; Aston, Joshua; Liu, Xinyi; Ying, Tianyu (2020-02-16). "Effects of misleading media coverage on public health crisis: a case of the 2019 novel coronavirus outbreak in China". Anatolia. 31 (2): 331–336. doi:10.1080/13032917.2020.1730621. ISSN 1303-2917. S2CID 213455169.
  40. ^ Vazquez, Marietta. "Calling COVID-19 the "Wuhan Virus" or "China Virus" is inaccurate and xenophobic". Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  41. ^ "COVID-19 Fact Check". COVID-19 Fact Check. Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  42. ^ "COVID-19 Archives". Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  43. ^ "PolitiFact | Coronavirus". Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  44. ^ "COVID-19: A Canadian timeline | Canadian Healthcare Network". Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  45. ^ Glauser, Wendy (2020-02-18). "Communication, transparency key as Canada faces new coronavirus threat". Canadian Medical Association Journal. 192 (7): E171–E172. doi:10.1503/cmaj.1095846. ISSN 0820-3946. PMC 7030882. PMID 32071113.
  46. ^ "How the Coronavirus Outbreak Played out on China's Social Media". The Diplomat. 31 January 2020. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  47. ^ "Critics Say China Has Suppressed And Censored Information In Coronavirus Outbreak". NPR. 8 February 2020. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  48. ^ "Germany: coronavirus cases change". Statista. Retrieved 2021-02-19.
  49. ^ "Einen Moment bitte, die Ausgabe wird geladen..." Retrieved 2021-02-19.
  50. ^ Boytchev, Hristio (2021-02-12). "Why did a German newspaper insist the Oxford AstraZeneca vaccine was inefficacious for older people—without evidence?". BMJ. 372: n414. doi:10.1136/bmj.n414. ISSN 1756-1833. PMID 33579678.
  51. ^ a b Muñiz, C., ed. (2021). Medios de comunicación y pandemia de Covid-19 en México. Tirant Humanidades. ISBN 978-84-18656-32-3.
  52. ^ a b "Sweden: COVID-19 reports 2020". Statista. Retrieved 2021-02-19.
  53. ^ Irwin, Rachel Elisabeth (December 2020). "Misinformation and de-contextualization: international media reporting on Sweden and COVID-19". Globalization and Health. 16 (1): 62. doi:10.1186/s12992-020-00588-x. ISSN 1744-8603. PMC 7356107. PMID 32660503.
  54. ^ Irwin, Rachel E (2020-08-03). "Misleading media coverage of Sweden's response to covid-19". BMJ. 370: m3031. doi:10.1136/bmj.m3031. ISSN 1756-1833. PMID 32747388.
  55. ^ Simons, Greg (2020-11-12). "Swedish Government and Country Image during the International Media Coverage of the Coronavirus Pandemic Strategy: From Bold to Pariah". Journalism and Media. 1 (1): 41–58. doi:10.3390/journalmedia1010004. ISSN 2673-5172.
  56. ^ Wahl-Jorgensen, Karin (14 February 2020). "Coronavirus: how media coverage of epidemics often stokes fear and panic". The Conversation. Retrieved 22 March 2020.
  57. ^ Tobitt, Charlotte (20 March 2020). "Coronavirus: Public distrust journalists despite relying on news media for daily updates, survey shows". Press Gazette. Retrieved 22 March 2020.
  58. ^ Fletcher, Richard; Kalogeropoulos, Antonis; Nielsen, Rasmus Kleis (2020-06-01). "Trust in UK Government and News Media COVID-19 Information Down, Concerns Over Misinformation from Government and Politicians Up". Rochester, NY. SSRN 3633002. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  59. ^ Calgary, Open. "United States COVID-19 Cases and Deaths by State over Time | Data | Centers for Disease Control and Prevention". Retrieved 2020-10-23.
  60. ^ Goldstein, Steve. "U.S. media is far more pessimistic in covering the coronavirus pandemic than anyone else". MarketWatch. Retrieved 2021-02-26.
  61. ^ Jiang, Xiaoya; Hwang, Juwon; Shah, Dhavan V.; Ghosh, Shreenita; Brauer, Markus (2021-01-13). "News Attention and Social-Distancing Behavior Amid COVID-19: How Media Trust and Social Norms Moderate a Mediated Relationship". Health Communication. 37 (6): 768–777. doi:10.1080/10410236.2020.1868064. ISSN 1041-0236. PMC 9107940. PMID 33438450.
  62. ^ Kim, Eunji; Shepherd, Michael E.; Clinton, Joshua D. (2020-09-08). "The effect of big-city news on rural America during the COVID-19 pandemic". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 117 (36): 22009–22014. doi:10.1073/pnas.2009384117. ISSN 0027-8424. PMC 7486744. PMID 32820075.
  63. ^ Yong, Ed. "How the Pandemic Defeated America". The Atlantic. No. September 2020. Retrieved 2 September 2020.
  64. ^ Karni, Annie (28 February 2020). "Trump Criticizes Media for Coverage of Coronavirus". The New York Times. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  65. ^ "Cable TV and Coronavirus: How Americans perceive the outbreak and view media coverage differ by main news source". Pew Research Center's Journalism Project. 2020-04-01. Retrieved 2021-02-26.
  66. ^ "Republicans are twice as likely as Democrats to view coronavirus coverage as exaggerated". Axios. 10 March 2020. Retrieved 22 March 2020.
  67. ^ a b Jurkowitz, Mark; Mitchell, Amy (2020-05-06). "Fewer Americans now say media exaggerated COVID-19 risks, but big partisan gaps persist". Pew Research Center. Retrieved 2021-03-31.{{cite news}}: CS1 maint: url-status (link)
  68. ^ Sacerdote B, Sehgal R, Cook M. (November 2020). "Why Is All COVID-19 News Bad News?" (PDF). NBER Working Paper Series. National Bureau of Economic Research. doi:10.3386/w28110. Retrieved May 24, 2021.{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: uses authors parameter (link)
  69. ^ Goldstein, Steve (November 23, 2020). "U.S. media is far more pessimistic in covering the coronavirus pandemic than anyone else". MarketWatch. New York, NY. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
  70. ^ Colvin, Geoff (November 29, 2020). "U.S. news coverage of COVID has been more negative than in other countries, researchers find". Fortune. New York City, NY. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
  71. ^ Lamparski, John (March 24, 2021). "Bad News Bias". The New York Times. New York, NY. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
  72. ^ Altaffer, Mary (March 24, 2021). "Covid coverage by the U.S. national media is an outlier, a study finds". The New York Times. New York, NY. Retrieved May 24, 2021.
  73. ^ Torres-Toukoumidis, Angel; Lagares-Díez, Nieves; Barredo-Ibáñez, Daniel (2021). "Accountability Journalism During the Emergence of COVID-19: Evaluation of Transparency in Official Fact-Checking Platforms". Marketing and Smart Technologies. Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies. 205: 561–572. doi:10.1007/978-981-33-4183-8_44. ISBN 978-981-33-4182-1. S2CID 236678913.
  74. ^ Smith, David (13 March 2020). "Fox News accused of downplaying coronavirus as it moves to protect staff". The Guardian. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  75. ^ Walters, Joanna; Aratani, Lauren; Beaumont, Peter (5 March 2020). "Trump calls WHO's global death rate from coronavirus 'a false number'". The Guardian.
  76. ^ Devlin, Hannah; Boseley, Sarah (13 March 2020). "Coronavirus facts: is there a cure and what is the mortality rate of the virus?". The Guardian. Retrieved 13 March 2020.
  77. ^ Grynbaum, Michael M. (2020-03-14). "Fox Business Benches Trish Regan After Outcry Over Coronavirus Comments". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved 2021-04-12.
  78. ^ Connelly, Joel (2020-03-18). "The Fox News switcheroo on COVID-19: A virus no longer downplayed". Retrieved 2020-04-07.
  79. ^ "On Fox News, suddenly a very different tune about the coronavirus". The Washington Post. 2020-03-16. Retrieved 2020-04-07.
  80. ^ Gabbatt, Adam (17 March 2020). "'We have a responsibility': Fox News declares coronavirus a crisis in abrupt U-turn". The Guardian. Retrieved 19 March 2020.
  81. ^ Rupar, Aaron (2020-03-24). "Fox News's coronavirus coverage slid back off the rails spectacularly on Monday night". Vox. Retrieved 2020-04-05.
  82. ^ Srikanth, Anagha (2020-07-08). "Tucker Carlson wrongly claims coronavirus prevention measures aren't backed by science". TheHill. Retrieved 2020-07-10.
  83. ^ "Trump baffles Sweden with crime comment, says it was based on TV report". Reuters. 2017-02-19. Retrieved 2017-02-20.
  84. ^ Gertz, Matt (2020-07-01). "How Fox News helped turn masks into another culture war flashpoint". Media Matters for America. Retrieved 2020-07-02.
  85. ^ Gertz, Matt (2020-04-16). "Fox News is promoting protests against social distancing measures: "God bless them"". Media Matters for America. Retrieved 2020-04-22.
  86. ^ "Fox News Gets Push-Back For Supporting Anti-Shutdown Protests". Retrieved 2020-04-22.
  87. ^ Motta, Matt; Stecula, Dominik; Farhart, Christina (2020-05-01). "How Right-Leaning Media Coverage of COVID-19 Facilitated the Spread of Misinformation in the Early Stages of the Pandemic in the U.S." Canadian Journal of Political Science. 53 (2): 335–342. doi:10.1017/S0008423920000396. ISSN 0008-4239. PMC 7251254.