Health communication in and out of public health emergencies: to persuade or to inform?

Much health communication during the COVID-19 pandemic has been designed to persuade people more than to inform them. For example, messages like masks save lives are intended to compel people to wear face masks, not to enable them to make an informed decision about whether to wear a face mask or to understand the justification for a mask mandate. Both persuading people and informing them are reasonable goals for health communication. However, those goals can sometimes be in conflict. In this article, we discuss potential conflicts between seeking to persuade or to inform people, the use of spin to persuade people, the ethics of persuasion, and implications for health communication in the context of the pandemic and generally. Decisions to persuade people rather than enable them to make an informed choice may be justified, but the basis for those decisions should be transparent and the evidence should not be distorted. We suggest nine principles to guide decisions by health authorities about whether to try to persuade people.

Automated summary

Health communication during the COVID-19 pandemic has focused more on persuading people rather than just informing them, which can sometimes lead to conflicts. Decisions to persuade people instead of enabling informed choice may be justified, but transparency and avoiding distortion of evidence are key considerations.