Public health communication is approached with caution because of its ability to shape perception of diseases and how they should be handled. This is especially the case when communications are being displayed in front of a national, and even global audience. As Susan Channa discussed in our recent lecture, public health experts try to ensure that all circumstances surrounding a communication are displayed in a way to best understand their contentions. For example, offering a conclusion, followed by three arguments with supporting points for each has been psychologically proven to resonate best with readers and listeners. Deploying methods such as bridging, hooking, and flagging are commonly used by experts to pull a conversation in a direction toward the expert’s desired talking points. Experts will even customize their zoom background so listeners can focus on their words without distraction.

Even with preparation, some public health communication may fail at the execution stage. This was evident during the earlier stages of the COVID-19 pandemic, where the CDC failed to make clarifications upon discovery of new evidence surrounding the virus. To illustrate some examples, the CDC initially stood by the position that face masks are not preventative, but later recommended them for multiple years. Quarantine periods for those sick with the virus changed from 14 days to 10 days, then to 5 but with qualifications. The CDC issued a later tweet that contradicted its 5-day period, and the director stated that the shorter quarantine period was fueled in part by a desire to “keep society functioning.” Additionally, the COVID map change on the CDC’s website created the perception that case numbers dropped considerably nationwide in one afternoon. Although the changing recommendations were likely based on new information, contradictions like these caused distrust among the public. Even with up-to-date information, infographics such as the vaccination activities chart that we viewed seemed to confuse readers. Thus, the CDC’s handling of COVID-19 outreach should emphasize the importance of well-prepared and well-executed public health communication.

With proper preparation and execution, public health institutions can gain credibility with the public. Because of communications efforts spearheaded by Susan Channa and other professionals during the COVID-19 pandemic, Emory University significantly increased its prominence in the public health field. Those speaking on behalf of the university were prepped to deal with reporters, utilizing different techniques to get their points across. To provide one example, Channa notes that interviewees have more flexibility to shape the narrative with a less experienced reporter, but also that reporters could play ignorant to catch inconsistencies. Because Emory professionals were equipped to handle COVID communications on a wide scale, they improved the university’s standing in public health discussions at a time when there was greater opportunity to fill information voids.