H1N1 influenza/swine flu: conFLUsion or knowledge asymmetry?

In a Foucauldian perspective, the power/knowledge correlation, which pervades all social relations, prevents some actions while enabling others. A case in point could be the knowledge-making/sharing process in the press communication constellation on swine flu, recently a major focus in the media communication flow, with marked differences between popular papers and specialized journals. As regards the complex notion of (meta)knowledge, the relevant issue for this study is how knowledge can be shared and what the effects might be (Cameron 2006:145). In particular, we intended to investigate – within the theoretical framework of both (Critical) Discourse Analysis and Evaluation/Appraisal – how forms of ‘are conveyed as opposed to ‘Common Ground knowledge’ in epistemic communities (van Dijk 2001, 2003). When considering the knowledge asymmetries (KAs) between different sources of information (scientific/popular press) on swine flu, we analysed how social knowledge was integrated with grammatical knowledge, and appraised the value of lexicon-grammar variation among textual genres and discourses. Our aim was to assess to what extent KAs may result in different interactional aspects. In tabloids, a large use of direct speech and of ‘catastrophe-oriented’ lexical choices, as well as code-switching to scientific language and to statistics utilized as ‘special effects’, are conducive to unjustified panic and to mystifying disinformation. On the other hand, the specialized jargon of professional journals excludes the general public and prevents people from making informed decisions. Our paper will provide/evaluate both qualitative and quantitative data from a corpus of 200 articles published in 2009/10:100 Research Articles drawn from leading journals of Medicine and 100 articles from UK tabloids.