Ever since its onset, the monkeypox outbreak (July 2022–May 2023), similarly to HIV in the 1980s, has been disproportionately associated with a category of people defined by international medical organisations and the media as gay, bisexual and men who have sex with men (GBMSM), since a higher percentage of infections has been reported among this cohort. Inevitably, the phenomenon has fuelled stigma and discrimination against the LGBTIQ+ community, leading to incidents of violence and ostracism. However, it was with the rollout of the vaccine in the UK and the US that monkeypox-related social exclusion soared to a dramatic extent, thereby reinforcing the false myth that sexual orientation can determine susceptibility to the virus. In this regard, official accredited sources like the UK NHS and the GOV UK website recommend that vaccine should be primarily administered to GBMSM “who have multiple partners or participate in sex groups or attend sex-on-premises venues”, thus publicly constructing this category as more vulnerable to contracting the disease. In light of this, the present study employs a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods to explore the discourses underpinning the (mis)representation of monkeypox. In particular, the methodology will involve corpus-based approaches to analyse a large dataset of newspaper articles, while a more qualitative and discourse-based analysis will focus on a series of institutional documents issued by the UK, the US and Italian governments and medical organisations. Underpinning both approaches is a Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) theoretical background in order to gain a deeper understanding of the data to: (i) unearth the discursive strategies whereby media representations and official guidelines have fed marginalisation and stigma against LGBTIQ+ individuals; (ii) analyse the deleterious impact of prejudiced language use in formal documents and international media coverage on healthseeking behaviour; and finally (iii) call for a more inclusive and evidence-based approach to public health communication so as to avoid perpetuating negative stereotypes and prejudices.
Breaking the Chains of Bias: Investigating Monkeypox (Mpox) Narratives in Public Health Discourse
Antonio Fruttaldo;
2025-01-01
Abstract
Ever since its onset, the monkeypox outbreak (July 2022–May 2023), similarly to HIV in the 1980s, has been disproportionately associated with a category of people defined by international medical organisations and the media as gay, bisexual and men who have sex with men (GBMSM), since a higher percentage of infections has been reported among this cohort. Inevitably, the phenomenon has fuelled stigma and discrimination against the LGBTIQ+ community, leading to incidents of violence and ostracism. However, it was with the rollout of the vaccine in the UK and the US that monkeypox-related social exclusion soared to a dramatic extent, thereby reinforcing the false myth that sexual orientation can determine susceptibility to the virus. In this regard, official accredited sources like the UK NHS and the GOV UK website recommend that vaccine should be primarily administered to GBMSM “who have multiple partners or participate in sex groups or attend sex-on-premises venues”, thus publicly constructing this category as more vulnerable to contracting the disease. In light of this, the present study employs a combination of quantitative and qualitative research methods to explore the discourses underpinning the (mis)representation of monkeypox. In particular, the methodology will involve corpus-based approaches to analyse a large dataset of newspaper articles, while a more qualitative and discourse-based analysis will focus on a series of institutional documents issued by the UK, the US and Italian governments and medical organisations. Underpinning both approaches is a Critical Discourse Studies (CDS) theoretical background in order to gain a deeper understanding of the data to: (i) unearth the discursive strategies whereby media representations and official guidelines have fed marginalisation and stigma against LGBTIQ+ individuals; (ii) analyse the deleterious impact of prejudiced language use in formal documents and international media coverage on healthseeking behaviour; and finally (iii) call for a more inclusive and evidence-based approach to public health communication so as to avoid perpetuating negative stereotypes and prejudices.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.
