TY - JOUR

T1 - Crisis Communication and crisis management during COVID-19

AU - Wodak, Ruth

N1 - This is a post-peer-review, pre-copy edited version of an article published in Global Discourse. The definitive publisher-authenticated version Author: Wodak, Ruth Source: Global Discourse: An interdisciplinary journal of current affairs, Volume 11, Number 3, May 2021, pp. 329-353(25) Publisher: Bristol University Press DOI: https://doi.org/10.1332/204378921X16100431230102 is available online at: https://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bup/gd/2021/00000011/00000003/art00002

PY - 2021/5/10

Y1 - 2021/5/10

N2 - This paper presents results from a comparative and qualitative discourse-historical analysis of governmental crisis communication in Austria, Germany, France, Hungary and Sweden, during the global COVID-19 pandemic lockdown from March 2020 to May 2020 (a ‘discourse strand’). By analysing a sample of important speeches and press conferences by government leaders (all performing as the ‘face of crisis management’), it is possible to deconstruct a range of discursive strategies announcing/legitimising restrictive measures in order to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic where everybody is in danger of falling ill, regardless of their status, position, education and so forth. I focus on four frames that have been employed to mitigate the ‘dread of death’ (Bauman, 2006) and counter the ‘denial of death’ (Becker, 1973/2020): a ‘religious frame’, a ‘dialogic frame’, a frame emphasising ‘trust’, and a frame of ‘leading a war’. These interpretation frameworks are all embedded in ‘renationalising’ tendencies, specifically visible in the EU member states where even the Schengen Area was suddenly abolished (in order to ‘keep the virus out’) and borders were closed. Thus, everybody continues to be confronted with national biopolitics and body politics (Wodak, 2021).

AB - This paper presents results from a comparative and qualitative discourse-historical analysis of governmental crisis communication in Austria, Germany, France, Hungary and Sweden, during the global COVID-19 pandemic lockdown from March 2020 to May 2020 (a ‘discourse strand’). By analysing a sample of important speeches and press conferences by government leaders (all performing as the ‘face of crisis management’), it is possible to deconstruct a range of discursive strategies announcing/legitimising restrictive measures in order to cope with the COVID-19 pandemic where everybody is in danger of falling ill, regardless of their status, position, education and so forth. I focus on four frames that have been employed to mitigate the ‘dread of death’ (Bauman, 2006) and counter the ‘denial of death’ (Becker, 1973/2020): a ‘religious frame’, a ‘dialogic frame’, a frame emphasising ‘trust’, and a frame of ‘leading a war’. These interpretation frameworks are all embedded in ‘renationalising’ tendencies, specifically visible in the EU member states where even the Schengen Area was suddenly abolished (in order to ‘keep the virus out’) and borders were closed. Thus, everybody continues to be confronted with national biopolitics and body politics (Wodak, 2021).

KW - pandemic

KW - Critical Discourse Analysis – Discourse-Historical Approach

KW - political communication

KW - Frame Analysis

KW - SPEECH

KW - crisis communication

KW - argumentation strategies • critical discourse analysis • discourse-historical method • family reunion • immigration • legitimation • recontextualization • scripts • social practices • systemic-functional linguistics • triangulation

U2 - 10.1332/204378921X16100431230102

DO - 10.1332/204378921X16100431230102

M3 - Journal article

VL - 11

SP - 329

EP - 353

JO - Global Discourse

JF - Global Discourse

SN - 2326-9995

IS - 3

ER -