Social media opposition to the 2022/2023 UK nurse strikes

Author:

Kalocsányiová Erika1ORCID,Essex Ryan1ORCID,Brophy Sorcha A.2ORCID,Sriram Veena3ORCID

Affiliation:

1. Institute for Lifecourse Development, Faculty of Education, Health and Human Sciences University of Greenwich London UK

2. Health Policy & Management, Mailman School of Public Health Columbia University New York New York USA

3. School of Population and Public Health & School of Public Policy and Global Affairs University of British Columbia Vancouver British Columbia Canada

Abstract

AbstractPrevious research has established that the success of strikes, and social movements more broadly, depends on their ability to garner support from the public. However, there is scant published research investigating the response of the public to strike action by healthcare workers. In this study, we address this gap through a study of public responses to UK nursing strikes in 2022–2023, using a data set drawn from Twitter of more than 2300 publicly available tweets. We focus on negative tweets, investigating which societal discourses social media users draw on to oppose strike action by nurses. Using a combination of corpus‐based approaches and discourse analysis, we identified five categories of opposition: (i) discourse discrediting nurses; (ii) discourse discrediting strikes by nurses; (iii) discourse on the National Health System; (iv) discourse about the fairness of strikers' demands and (v) discourse about potential harmful impact. Our findings show how social media users operationalise wider societal discourses about the nursing profession (e.g., associations with care, gender, vocation and sacrifice) as well as recent crises such as the Covid‐19 pandemic to justify their opposition. The results also provide valuable insights into misconceptions about nursing, strike action and patient harm, which can inform strategies for public communication.

Publisher

Wiley

Subject

General Nursing

Reference59 articles.

1. Anthony L.(2022).AntConc(Version 4.2.0) [Computer software].https://www.laurenceanthony.net/software/antconc/

2. The geographic embedding of online echo chambers: Evidence from the Brexit campaign

3. BBC. (2020 March 27). Newspaper headlines: Applause for coronavirus NHS “heroes” and “Checkpoint Britain”.https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/blogs-the-papers-52058049

4. The opinions of Polish nurses and patients on nursing protests;Binkowska‐Bury M.;Collegium Antropologicum,2013

5. A Foucauldian discourse analysis of media reporting on the nurse‐as‐hero during COVID‐19

Cited by 2 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3