There is nothing like a threat to bring out our strengths and weaknesses. Sadly, the national debate may not be strong enough to cope with the coronavirus.
When it became clear that it was travelling across borders, a newspaper announced that the country was not ready for the virus. But, so far, the health authorities seem as ready as they could be. While we don’t know how they would cope with a widespread outbreak, they appear to have taken any precaution they can.
The debate, on the other hand, has had all its flaws exposed: danger has brought out the worst in many of those who tell us what we should think.
One common response is alarmism. We were sure to be told that the country was not ready because people and organisations who enjoy access to media assume that a majority-ruled SA cannot deal with anything. The belief that rule by black people always ends badly is deeply rooted here. When a virus threatens, this prompts people to insist that we are all doomed, whatever the evidence says. Alarm is spread on social media, none of it inspired by the faintest grasp of reality.
In a society as divided as this one, the panic quickly prompts people to blame those they see as a threat.
Before the first case was identified here, talk radio was deluged with callers warning that our “porous” borders would be the death of us all. It was clear that they were not worried about affluent people returning from Italian ski holidays. They were, rather, reviving that old urban legend, invasion by the disease-ridden hordes who are imagined to inhabit the rest of the continent. Racism directed at Chinese people has been added to the toxic brew.
The virus has also brought an outbreak of conspiracy theories: it was, we are told, manufactured in Chinese laboratories or by the CIA or whoever your chosen enemy happens to be.
It has also inspired an eruption of poor journalism, particularly on radio and television. It has become common to believe that merely sitting behind a microphone makes you an expert on everything and gives you the right to inflict your opinions on everyone: denouncing the government is a sign of expertise, whatever the evidence. And so, talking heads deplore the government’s failure to protect us without providing a single credible piece of evidence to back their claim.
Predictably, the virus has become a political football. The prize for misusing it goes to the SA Institute of Race Relations, which has begun a campaign to demand the suspension of hearings on land expropriation for fear of spreading the virus. (Oddly, no doctors or scientists have mentioned that the virus is spread only in gatherings where people talk about land). It is only a matter of time before its lead is followed by others unable to pass up the chance of using the virus for political gain.
Accurate information is essential to fighting a virus. So, if people must rely for information on fear-ridden fictions, deep-rooted prejudices and the selfish search for limelight and political gain, this is itself a public health problem.
But not all is lost. Some media outlets and citizens are helping the country to deal with the problem. What they say is backed by solid evidence; they encourage people to be careful without spreading panic. The country is blessed with medical professionals and scientists who are grounded in reality.
Prospects for fighting the virus may depend not on denouncing health authorities who seem to know what to do but on whether the people can be persuaded to look beyond toxicity beamed to them on the airwaves and in cyberspace and to rely on those who are guided by knowledge and a desire to help.
• Friedman is research professor with the humanities faculty of the University of Johannesburg
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.