首页> 美国卫生研究院文献>Genomics Society and Policy >Crisis Communication in Public Health Emergencies: The Limits of ‘Legal Control’ and the Risks for Harmful Outcomes in a Digital Age
【2h】

Crisis Communication in Public Health Emergencies: The Limits of ‘Legal Control’ and the Risks for Harmful Outcomes in a Digital Age

机译:突发公共卫生事件中的危机沟通:数字时代的法律控制的局限性和有害后果的风险

代理获取
本网站仅为用户提供外文OA文献查询和代理获取服务,本网站没有原文。下单后我们将采用程序或人工为您竭诚获取高质量的原文,但由于OA文献来源多样且变更频繁,仍可能出现获取不到、文献不完整或与标题不符等情况,如果获取不到我们将提供退款服务。请知悉。

摘要

Communication by public authorities during a crisis situation is an essential and indispensable part of any response to a situation that may threaten both life and property. In the online connected world possibilities for such communication have grown further, in particular with the opportunity that social media presents. As a consequence, communication strategies have become a key plank of responses to crises ranging from epidemics to terrorism to natural disaster. Such strategies involve a range of innovative practices on social media. Whilst being able to bring about positive effects, they can also bring about a range of harmful unintended side effects. This include economic harms produced by incorrect information and a range of social harms that can be fuelled by myths and rumours, worsening negative phenomena such as stigmatisation and discrimination. Given the potential for such harms, one might expect that affected or potentially affected individuals would be able to challenge such measures before courts or administrative tribunals. As this paper demonstrates however this is not the case. More often than not seemingly applicable legal approaches are unlikely to be able to engage such methods. This is often because such measures represent activities that are purely expressive in nature and therefore not capable of imposing any binding legal or corporeal changes on individuals. Whilst some forms of soft law may pose requirements for public officials involved in such activities (e.g. codes of conduct or of professional ethics), they are not likely to offer potentially harmed individuals the chance to to challenge particular communication strategies before courts or legal tribunals. The result is that public authorities largely have a free reign to communicate how they wish and do not have to have to comply with a range of requirements (e.g. relating to form and substantive) content) that would in general apply to most forms of official administrative act.
机译:在应对可能威胁生命和财产的局势时,公共机构在危机情况下的沟通是必不可少的部分。在在线连接的世界中,尤其是随着社交媒体的出现,这种交流的可能性进一步增加。结果,沟通策略已成为应对从流行病到恐怖主义到自然灾害等危机的关键平台。此类策略涉及社交媒体上的一系列创新实践。尽管能够带来积极的影响,但它们也可能带来一系列有害的意外副作用。其中包括错误信息造成的经济损害,以及神话和谣言助长的一系列社会损害,加剧了诸如污名化和歧视之类的负面现象。考虑到潜在的危害,人们可能希望受影响或潜在受影响的个人能够向法院或行政法庭提出质疑。正如本文所演示的,事实并非如此。通常看似适用的法律方法不太可能采用这种方法。这通常是因为此类措施代表的活动本质上纯粹是表达性的,因此无法对个人施加任何有约束力的法律或有形变更。尽管某些形式的软法可能会对参与此类活动的公职人员提出要求(例如行为守则或职业道德),但它们不太可能为可能受到伤害的个人提供机会在法院或法律法庭面前挑战特定的沟通策略。结果是,公共主管部门在很大程度上可以自由地表达自己的意愿,而不必遵守通常适用于大多数形式的官方行政的一系列要求(例如,与形式和实质相关的内容)法案。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
代理获取

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号