COVID-19, Fake News, and Vaccines: Should Regulation Be Implemented?

We analysed issues concerning the establishment of compulsory vaccination against COVID-19, as well as the role of misinformation as a disincentive-especially when published by health professionals-and citizen acceptance of measures in this regard. Data from different surveys revealed a high degree of hesitation rather than outright opposition to vaccines. The most frequent complaint related to the COVID-19 vaccination was the fear of side effects. Within the Spanish and European legislative framework, both compulsory vaccination and government regulation of FN (Fake News) appear to be feasible options, counting on sufficient legal support, which could be reinforced by additional amendment. However, following current trends of good governance, policymakers must have public legitimation. Rather than compulsory COVID-19 vaccination, an approach based on education and truthful information, persuading the population of the benefits of a vaccine on a voluntary basis, is recommended. Disagreements between health professionals are positive, but they should be resolved following good practice and the procedures of the code of ethics. Furthermore, citizens do not support the involvement of government authorities in the direct control of news. Collaboration with the media and other organizations should be used instead.

Automated summary

Research shows that there is hesitation rather than outright opposition to COVID-19 vaccines, with the main concern being side effects. Within the legislative framework, compulsory vaccination and regulation of fake news seem feasible options, but direct control of news by government authorities is not supported by citizens, who prefer collaboration with media and other organizations.