Was the Media Right? Fewer Americans Now Say Media Exaggerated COVID-19 Risks
Mark Jurkowitz and Amy Mitchell, Pew Research Center
|
|
As Americans continue to give the news media a solid grade overall for coverage of the COVID-19 pandemic, the percentage who say journalists have exaggerated the risks of the outbreak has decreased notably in recent weeks, according to survey data from Pew Research Center’s
Election News Pathway project.
Some key findings include:
- 69% of respondents say the news media have covered the outbreak "very well" or "somewhat well" — a number that is virtually unchanged from the 70% of respondents who said the same thing in a survey conducted from March 10-16.
- The percentage of Americans who say the news media have greatly or slightly exaggerated the risks COVID-19 poses dropped from 62% in March to 48% in April. This includes a decline in the sample saying the media have greatly exaggerated the risks, from 37% to 24%. The portion of respondents who say the media have gotten the COVID-19 risks about right grew by 9 percentage points – from 30% to 39%.
- 54% of Republicans and independents who lean toward the Republican Party say the media have covered COVID-19 somewhat or very well in the April survey, a number that swells to 82% among Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents.
Read more to learn about the public's perception of media coverage during COVID-19.
|
|
Lessons Earned: Aflac CCO Looks to Real-Time Communications During COVID-19
Catherine Hernandez-Blades, IPR Trustee, Aflac
|
|
In partnership with
PR News, “Lessons Earned”
is a series featuring IPR Trustees discussing a hard-fought lesson or triumph that helped to mold or change their career.
In this installment, we hear from IPR Trustee and Aflac's SVP, chief ESG and Communications Officer Catherine Hernandez-Blades.
There are few businesses that the COVID-19 pandemic has not touched. At Aflac, similar to many businesses, the company went from a single-digit percent of telecommuters to more than 90% remote workers in two weeks.
Aflac has adopted several practices to ensure the company's business imperatives remain strong during the COVID-19 crisis:
- Encourage audiences to head to a single place for updates. That way, you can make changes in real time, rather than constantly distributing updates en masse.
- Lean on your team! During a crisis, there’s still a component of business as usual. It’s important to make sure you have business continuity issues covered.
- Stay attuned to what is happening on every level of the business. Executives should roll up their sleeves and draft, approve, and publish copy when necessary.
Learn more how Aflac has adjusted to these new and ever-changing times.
|
|
COVID-19's Psychological Toll: Mental Distress Among Americans Has Tripled During the Pandemic Compared to 2018
Jean Twenge, Ph.D., San Diego State University; and Thomas Joiner, Ph.D., Florida State University
|
|
As the full weight of the COVID-19 crises was settling on the country’s shoulders,
recent research found that more than 1-in-4 American adults met the criteria that psychologists use to diagnose serious mental distress and illness — this represents a roughly 700% increase from pre-pandemic data collected in 2018.
Researchers at San Diego State University and Florida State University used a six-item scale taken from research conducted in 2018 to assess the mental health of more than 2,000 Americans spread across the country.
Preliminary results found:
- Among adults living at home with kids under the age of 18, the rate of severe distress rose from just 3% in 2018 to 37% last month.
- Roughly 70% of Americans experienced moderate-to-severe mental distress—triple the rate seen in 2018.
- On top of the loss of jobs and the obvious health risks associated with COVID-19, the element of uncertainty is causing Americans a great deal of psychological distress.
The authors discuss the differences in mental distress among the two samples, how this will impact society, and offers mental health resource recommendations to combat this pervasive issue.
|
|
Enabling and Engaging Your Organization Through Change: Re-Entering the Workplace in COVID-19
Sherry Scott, Gagen MacDonald
|
|
Over the past month, it’s become increasingly clear that COVID-19 is going to be present in society, and within the lives of our companies, for a long time to come. With this in mind, leading companies are pivoting from simply managing anxiety and uncertainty – the initial phase of crisis response – to establishing a “new normal” and planning to re-enter the workplace.
From the work done with clients to what we learn from engaging with employees and organizations, a clear best practice is emerging:
Though we will likely re-enter the workplace slowly and in waves, preparation for the “new normal” is happening now. Gagen MacDonald recently published a
white paper outlining best practices and insights to establish this foundation.
A few best practices from this report include:
- Target communication plans for specific employee groups based on various re-entry scenarios.
- Assess the lessons learned from your organization's COVID-19 response to date.
- Audit all communication channels to streamline efforts for future events.
- Re-purpose popular new vehicles and sunset ineffective old platforms.
Read more to learn how to make your organization more human-centric while re-entering the workplace.
|
|
Employee Trust Transforms During COVID-19: How to Cultivate Higher Levels of Trust
Orangefiery
|
|
Orangefiery conducted an online survey on April 28, 2020, with a random sample of 469 U.S. employed adults examining changes in trust due to the COVID-19 pandemic.
This research shows that more than a third of U.S. employees say their level of trust in their organizations has changed during the COVID-19 pandemic, with equal levels reporting gains in trust (17%) as reductions in trust (17%) as the public health response to the novel coronavirus continues to impact organizations across the country.
Some major themes include:
- Accuracy matters. A lot. When asked whether communications were factually accurate, most respondents said “always” (41%) or “most of the time” (39%), while fewer said sometimes (15%), rarely (4%) or never (1%).
- Respondents who said communications were “always” accurate vs. accurate “most of the time” were significantly more likely to rate communications as being more satisfying, trustworthy, clear, and honest and open.
- Using the right frequency and communications channels can also make a significant impact. Those who believe their organizations are communicating with them frequently enough (78%) are much more likely to rate the communications highly on important measures such as trustworthiness and clarity of message.
- Meeting employee needs and listening to feedback needs more attention. Only 52% said their organization is “very” or “extremely” committed to satisfying employee communications needs (vs. 57% in March).
- Only 49% said they believe their organization is “very” or “extremely” interested in hearing employee feedback (vs. 48% in March).
Learn more about the results of the survey and how to cultivate employee trust during the COVID-19 pandemic
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
