Watch the video, read the text further below, or download the flyer at the bottom.
Most institutional communication regarding the 2020 pandemic was terrible.
Let’s review some of the core mistakes and what institutions can do differently in the future.
Don’t: say things that might be incorrect
Remember the March 2020 WHO tweet containing the following text? “FACT: #COVID19 is NOT airborne.”
Not only do we know now that the tweet was factually wrong (COVID is, in fact, airborne), but more importantly, we could have known even then that the tweet was wrong. That’s because there was no certainty that COVID wasn’t airborne.
The takeaway is never to say things that might be incorrect, and especially not present them as FACTS. Because once people realize that an institution said something incorrect, their trust in it will vanish.
Don’t: exaggerate
In 2021, US President Biden said, “If you’re vaccinated, you won’t get COVID-19.”
This was an exaggeration. While COVID vaccines do help reduce the likelihood of severe outcomes from an infection, they certainly do not prevent infections fully.
Exaggerating should always be avoided: it destroys public trust and gives easy openings to charlatans to peddle even worse claims.
Do: use nuance when necessary
Do masks work? We covered this answer at length here and here, and while the answer “yes” is technically correct (in the sense that they do reduce the chance of infections,” such an answer is also prone to be misunderstood. For example, it might invite remarks such as “if masks work, why did I get infected even if I wore one?” or “if masks work, I will be safe with my cloth mask.”
Instead, a better approach is to use nuance when required. For example, “masks reduce the risk of infections significantly but not fully; N99 masks more than N95 ones, N95 masks more than surgical ones, surgical masks more than cloth ones, and cloth masks have very little effect but still more than no mask.”
Keep things simple but without oversimplifying.
Don’t: appeal to the in-group
A lot of institutional communication during 2020 and 2021 used polarizing language that appealed to those who were already aligned with what was asked of the population and instead angered those it was supposed to convince.
This type of communication is useless at best and damaging at worst.
Do: appeal to the out-group
A better alternative is to speak to those who aren’t aligned with the institution yet, addressing their concerns instead of ignoring them.
Don’t: write for scientists
Some institutions use overly technical language or assume that the general population knows the reasoning behind the proposed policies. This severely limits the effectiveness of the message.
Do: write for common people
A better alternative is to write in the simplest language possible, explaining assumptions and reasonings – all the while without feeling patronizing.
Don’t: use the words “trust us”
Only institutions with a long track record of trustworthiness can use the words “trust us” effectively. In all other cases, their use will backfire.
Institutions that are at least partially distrusted should instead use other arguments to achieve buy-in.
Don’t: dismiss difficult questions
For example, in early 2021, the public had questions about the safety of vaccines. Some governments didn’t take those concerns seriously and either ignored them or used dismissive replies such as “They’re safe, trust us.”
Not only does this behavior destroy trust. But the public has questions, and if institutions don’t answer them, the public will believe whatever charlatan does.
Do: earn trust by answering difficult questions
Institutions can and should build trust by answering difficult questions.
They can proactively ask the public what concerns they have, listen without interrupting, and then answer the concerns without dismissing them.
Don’t: order
People don’t like being ordered to do things, especially if they’re not explained first why, and especially if they don’t trust the person ordering them.
Do: explain
Instead of ordering the population to do something, or at least before ordering them, explain what they should do and why it matters. If what you ask of them is hard, proactively address these difficulties without dismissing them, and offer solutions or explain why you believe that what you ask of them is worth doing despite the costs of doing so.
Don’t: treat people like children
Treating people like children (e.g., patronizing them) yields child-like behavior.
Do: treat people like adults
Acknowledge that the people you address have complex, busy lives and real concerns.
Do not expect 100% compliance on everything you ask of them. Respect them, prioritize your asks, and avoid unnecessary waste of their time and energy.
Download all the one-pagers as a PDF here.