Speech

When does concern for public health cease to be grounded in reality and becomes a matter of exaggeration and excessive precaution? Can actions to warn the public be taken too far, leading to mass hysteria as opposed to an informed populace? Seldom do members of governmental organizations or the media ask these questions of their agenda and distinguish between superfluous and essential information. As a result, many of their warnings to the public concerning infectious diseases lead to an overreaction and atmosphere of panic. In order to rectify this situation and prevent further chaos at the hands of an infectious disease, public and media officials must strive to release accurate information to the public that is not based purely on speculation and worst-case scenarios. Although some may argue that this speculation is needed in order to forewarn the public about possible epidemics that will affect them in the future, others contend that proven aspects of a disease, less exaggerated prognoses, and control of information is necessary if the nation hopes to address an epidemic and pandemic in a concerted and well-managed fashion.

However feasible a prognosis regarding the spread of an infectious disease may be, efforts to address the public on the subject of said disease should be based on known aspects of the disease and not what traits it could acquire in the future. Following the H5N1 (avian flu) epidemic that was mainly concentrated in parts of Asia, the government reacted by releasing statements predicting a pandemic capable of causing numerous fatalities in the United States. As a result, the media built upon this unfavorable prognosis and predicted a near apocalyptic scenario. One such scenario was created in the form of a documentary called The Great Influenza. In this documentary, it was hypothesized that the avian flu had the potential to spread worldwide and kill millions of people. Although such an overblown reaction is to be expected from the media, governmental organizations cannot present purely speculative information regarding diseases to the public as reality. As a result of this speculation, the public is subjected to what is often an unnecessary fear at the hands of a disease that may have little to no effect on the country itself. Fear often does little to prepare the public for a pandemic and, instead, causes it to develop ignorance for the actual facets of the disease as well as unrealistic aversion to the issue altogether. If the nation is to expect its people to stay well informed and prepared for the disease as a whole, it must inform them accurately and qualify its information.

However difficult it may be to achieve, transparency on the part of the government when handling accurate information is essential if the public is to comprehend the actual and effects of the disease at hand. Currently, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) withhold vast information from the public in regard to the location of outbreaks and certain aspects of the disease itself. Specifically, as described in The Hot Zone, a work of non-fiction written by a scientist who has studied this horrifying disease and its cases, Richard Preston, the CDC has long kept information about the outbreaks of Ebola in the United States localized and unavailable to the public. Some of this information should be withheld in order to protect the privacy of the affected citizens. However, the withholding of vital information about a disease that will undoubtedly affect the lives of the citizens needs to be released in order to allow the public to adequately prepare. If these details are not released, the media builds upon the ignorance of the citizens and creates panic in an effort to uncover the truth or what the media believes to be the truth. Hence, an effort taken by the government to prevent panic only serves to spread ignorance which, in turn, lends itself to interpretation and to a media-driven state of uninformed fear.