Health communication plays a crucial role in shaping attitudes and behaviors that impact the well-being of individuals and communities.
However, the notion of persuasion in public health communication has become a subject of concern, as it raises questions about how government agencies and experts address knowledge gaps and public ignorance.
In the social media communicational landscapes of today, health officers tend
to tread carefully to avoid appearing patronizing or paternalistic.
![]() |
Nuanced landscape for health communication in the age of social media (Created with content of this post via OpenAI) |
Navigating language and perception
As revealed by Charles Briggs' interviews with health officials in California, there is unease regarding certain words used in health campaigns.
Terms like "message," "public," and "target" are perceived as projecting a top-down approach and demographic profiling.
To address this concern, some of Brigg’s interviewees nurtured empathy in their views of the public as neighbours, family, and friends.
![]() |
Visualizing member's of one's community can help health communicators (Created with OpenArt) |
Persuasion at the heart of social media use
And yet, the notion of persuasion lurks in health communication endeavours. Social media has become an integral part of health communication strategies.
Such is a dimension made visible by Auger's work on the Twitter communication of charitable organizations in the
health, environmental, and human services sectors, as documented by Auger.
These institutions often employ one-way communication methods to promote events, seek support, and foster dialogue.
Auger's account
highlights the persuasive nature of such communication, as these organizations
actively work towards achieving specific goals and agendas.
Public scepticism adds complexity
In the age of social media, organizations drive to persuade is at odds with the amplification of public scepticism, making vocabulary a crucial aspect of health communication.
Communicators must then
navigate a landscape where they need to continually work on building their
trust and credibility, hoping to reduce public doubt.
Building and strengthening relationships
One approach to address these anxieties is to embrace the
fact that health agencies, healthcare providers, and governments have specific
aims and objectives when communicating with the public.
Kate Smitko's work on donor engagement through Twitter illustrates
this perspective, framing communication on social media platforms as an
opportunity to build and strengthen relationships with donors.
Smitko’s approach is helpful to realize that when a
clear and unequivocal public health interest is at stake, the persuasive nature
of health communication is justified, and should therefore be deployed transparently.
This must be done with sensitivity, taking into account the concerns raised by health officers about language use and public perception.
Permanent community building and maintenance efforts of a dialogical nature, as suggested by Auger, are arguably essential for public engagement that can translate in constructive health attitudes and behaviours.
Comments
Post a Comment