Na dúvida, “tratamento precoce”: desinformação sobre fármacos ineficazes contra covid-19 na cobertura jornalística

Abstract

This research emerged from the theme “Journalism and denialism in the pandemic: the dilemma of access to information, health and scientific knowledge”. Therefore, sought to investigate the impacts of official denialist discourses on journalistic coverage related to the Covid-19 pandemic in Brazil. Focusing on the coverage of the false “early treatment” or “covid kit”, the research consisted of a content analysis of journalistic articles from the Folha de S. Paulo daily newspaper, according to Laurence Bardin, based on the adapted criteria matrix of verification by Adriana Santana. Our hypothesis was that the expressions “covid kit” and “early treatment” would have been absorbed and adopted by Folha de S. Paulo without a standardized approach, in which the adoption of declaratory journalism based on official sources ended up prevailing. Thus, through misinformation associated with these expressions, the newspaper added to disinformation regarding the Covid-19 pandemic. Among the authors we work with, for the discussion on human rights and ethics, are Costas Douzinas and Emmanuel Lévinas. We also reflect on science and denialism from the research carried out by historians Naomi Oreskes and Erik Conway, and we use Leon Festinger's theory of cognitive dissonance to understand the misinformation process. For considerations on journalism’s productive routines and procedures, we bring the contributions of Nelson Traquina, Pereira Junior and Adriana Santana. The content analysis indicated a prevalence of official government sources in the articles analyzed – present in 86% of the texts. In 66% of the news articles, there was ambiguity regarding the validity of using ineffective drugs for Covid- 19 to treat the disease. We concluded that the ambiguity in framing the question contributed to disinformation and, consequently, to the reduction of cognitive dissonances in relation to false treatments.