Framing COVID-19: How we conceptualize and discuss the pandemic on Twitter (2004.06986v2)

Abstract: Doctors and nurses in these weeks are busy in the trenches, fighting against a new invisible enemy: Covid-19. Cities are locked down and civilians are besieged in their own homes, to prevent the spreading of the virus. War-related terminology is commonly used to frame the discourse around epidemics and diseases. Arguably the discourse around the current epidemic will make use of war-related metaphors too,not only in public discourse and the media, but also in the tweets written by non-experts of mass communication. We hereby present an analysis of the discourse around #Covid-19, based on a corpus of 200k tweets posted on Twitter during March and April 2020. Using topic modelling we first analyze the topics around which the discourse can be classified. Then, we show that the WAR framing is used to talk about specific topics, such as the virus treatment, but not others, such as the effects of social distancing on the population. We then measure and compare the popularity of the WAR frame to three alternative figurative frames (MONSTER, STORM and TSUNAMI) and a literal frame used as control (FAMILY). The results show that while the FAMILY literal frame covers a wider portion of the corpus, among the figurative framings WAR is the most frequently used, and thus arguably the most conventional one. However, we conclude, this frame is not apt to elaborate the discourse around many aspects involved in the current situation. Therefore, we conclude, in line with previous suggestions, a plethora of framing options, or a metaphor menu, may facilitate the communication of various aspects involved in the Covid-19-related discourse on the social media, and thus support civilians in the expression of their feelings, opinions and ideas during the current pandemic.

• The paper employs corpus-based topic modeling on over 200,000 tweets to uncover key thematic clusters and prevalent figurative frames.
• It demonstrates that both war metaphors and literal frames uniquely shape public discourse on COVID-19 on social media.
• The study’s findings offer actionable insights for refining public health messaging strategies during global crises.

Analysis and Framing of COVID-19 Discourses on Twitter

The paper by Wicke and Bolognesi offers a robust corpus-based analysis of how the COVID-19 pandemic is conceptualized and discussed on Twitter through various linguistic frames. Utilizing topic modeling, the research elucidates the emergent topics and the figurative frames prevalent in the discourse, especially highlighting the intensive use of war-related metaphors. The analysis is grounded in social media, which provides a real-time and wide-reaching platform for public discourse, thus offering relevant insights into public sentiment and conceptualization methods during a global health crisis.

Methodological Overview

The authors employ a methodological approach grounded in topic modeling, specifically using Latent Dirichlet Allocation (LDA), to decompose the corpus into thematic clusters. The research encompasses a comprehensive dataset, initially compiling over 200,000 tweets based on specific COVID-19 hashtags over a two-week period, before expanding into more extensive and diverse datasets. The paper systematically filters these tweets to prevent bias from high-frequency tweeters and retweets, ensuring a balanced representation of discourse content.

Key Findings

Topics in COVID-19 Discourse

The COVID-19 discourse on Twitter is categorized into several core topics:

1. Communications and Reporting: This covers the dissemination of information and updates about the pandemic.
2. Community and Social Compassion: This includes expressions of solidarity, emotional support, and community action.
3. Politics: Focusing on political responses, leadership critique, and policy discussions.
4. Reacting to the Epidemic: Encompassing personal and societal responses, including health measures and lifestyle changes.

The paper further refines these into more granular subtopics, revealing specific concerns in treatment and diagnostics.

Figurative Framing

A significant component of the research is the analysis of metaphorical language, particularly the "WAR" frame, which involves lexical units such as "battle," "combat," and "fight." The WAR metaphor emerged as the most frequently used figurative frame among those analyzed, indicating its conventional role in crisis narratives. However, its prevalence is notably context-specific, predominantly framing discussions on treatment and public health measures rather than social or emotional aspects.

The research juxtaposes the WAR frame with alternative metaphoric constructs such as the "STORM," "MONSTER," and "TSUNAMI" frames. These alternatives attract less attention comparatively, with the data indicating a varied use of figurative language to capture different aspects of the pandemic’s multifaceted impact.

Literal Frame Usage

In contrast to figurative frames, the literal frame "FAMILY" was employed to discuss interpersonal relationships and social impacts within the pandemic context. This literal framing encompasses a broader content scope, underscoring its critical role in narratives surrounding personal experiences and familial dynamics during the crisis.

Implications and Future Directions

The findings provide compelling evidence of the instrumental role metaphor plays in structuring public discourse around a global health crisis. The paper underscores the need for diverse frames to articulate the complex dimensions of reality posed by a pandemic comprehensively. The implications extend toward enhancing communicative strategies in public health messaging, potentially aiding in framing COVID-related information more effectively to alleviate confusion or anxiety among the public.

Moreover, the research invites further investigation into longitudinal changes in discourse as the pandemic evolves, hinting at shifts in thematic focus and metaphorical language as public perception and the pandemic landscape change. Such studies could enable a deeper understanding of the linguistic and conceptual shifts over time, offering insights invaluable for policymakers and health communicators.

In conclusion, Wicke and Bolognesi's paper advances the understanding of linguistic framing in digital discourse during critical global events, providing both a methodological framework and an analytical foundation for future research in this domain.