Week 4 Topic discussion 1

[Saranath]

Please watch VDOs of public communication regarding COVID-19 situation from the leaders of two countries: Singapore and the USA. Then try to observe whether the two leaders are good communicators or not. When watching the VDOs try to look for the six principles of CREC, recommended by the CDC:

[Auswin Rojanasumapong]

Compares two leaders communicating about the COVID-19 situation, there are some details that both are different

1. Be first: From both messages, in my opinion, they tried to communicate at the right time and as early as possible, but for Singapore PM he stated that the situation has been started for 2 weeks which is acceptable to consider all the facts discovered and the real situation that was happening.

2. Be right: In my opinion, they both told the truth, but for US President some messages are overexaggerated (eg. we are/have the best … in the world). Singapore PM’s statements are, also in my opinion, more humble and realistic.

3. Be credible: They both tried their best to state the situation with truthfulness, but again, the tone of the message from Singapore PM is more humble and realistic which might gain more trust from the listener.

4. Express empathy: Singapore PM’s message mentions the natural human reactions to the situation (“fear and anxiety”). This statement might be the key that shows the understanding of people’s reactions and mental status. Focusing on the psychological and emotional situation of the people is what makes this message different from the US President’s message.

5. Promote action: Both leaders state the meaningful things to do, but US President’s message mentions the economics issue more, while Singapore PM’s message emphasizes more on what the people should or shouldn’t do.

6. Show respect: Both show respect to the audience, but for the US President some of the messages, in my opinion, about others’ fault (eg. poor situation control in Europe) are not necessary.

In conclusion, I think both tried their best to communicate about the situation, but the style of the presentation, the audiences they focus on, and their working team might be different which leads to different approaches.

[Saranath]

Great! Another thing to be observed is the consistency of the speech over time. To build a public trust, the leader should provide consistent messages or opinion across different communication platform. If you follow Trump’s tweeter, he sometimes tweeted inappropriate messages. This might not be good for building trust to the people.

[Arwin Jerome Manalo Onda]

We have the same analysis on the Respect principle. It felt unnecessary and unprofessional to compare their response versus other nation’s response. Since it is a global phenomenon, every nation should express collaboration in combating the disease.

[Sri Budi Fajariyan]

Here’s a comparison of communications between Singapore’s prime minister and American president based on the six CREC principles recommended by the CDC:
1. Be First
Singapore: at the beginning of the video, he explains that Singapore has faced an epidemic for two weeks. This shows a fast communication response
America: communication when cases arise and things worsen
2. Be Right
Singapore: provides data on most of the issues from China, but some cases cannot be traced to the source. It is possible that transmission has occurred in the community.
America: less use of data as a basis for an opinion
3. Be Credible
Singapore: Provides an overview of the seriousness of the disease based on data, provides information on things that cannot be done, that traces the origin of transmission of several cases
America: Looks like blaming Europe for rising cases in America
4 Express empathy
Singapore: Expressing empathy by giving advice not to panic because the country has not locked down cities and has logistics supplies so that people don’t have to pile up instant noodles and toilet paper.
America: It looks more proud of its country than showing sympathy for the people
5. Promote action Singapore: The message given to the community is clear:
– to pay attention to personal hygiene
-Wash your hand often
-avoid touching your eye or face
-take your temperature twice daily
-if you do not well avoid crowded places and see the doctor
-as well as advise not to panic
America: same message as Singapore and adding a lot of economic mechanisms to help people
6. Show respect
Singapore: At the end of the video, he appreciates volunteers who distribute masks, students who distribute food, health workers, etc. The prime minister of Singapore also makes videos in 3 languages, English, Malay, and Mandarin. it shows respect for all ethnic majority in the country
America: not giving appreciation to people who are struggling in a pandemic situation

[chanapong]

Comparing public communication regarding the COVID-19 situation from the leaders of two countries: Singapore and the USA, based on the CREC principle is described as following

1. Be first: The Singapore leader publicly communicated the COVID-19 situation after two weeks of the event. While, the US leader communicated after the situation worsen, new clusters, and WHO declared COVID-19 as a global pandemic.

2. Be right: Both leaders told the real information of the current situation.

3. Be credible: Singapore PM explained all the situation in detail and was more humble. For the US PM, he provided information in overview and accused European travelers of causing a new cluster and overexaggerating the healthcare and economics systems.

4. Express empathy: Singapore’s leader’s public communication included understanding the anxiety and reactions of people to the situation and encouraging people to solve the problem together.

5. Promote action: Both leaders provide information on how to prevent the spreading of COVID-19. But, the US provided more about the economy and financial measures to help its people.

6. Show respect: The end of Singapore PM communication mentioned paying respect to volunteers and healthcare workers. While the US did not mention or honor the frontline workers’ hardship.

[Auswin Rojanasumapong]

I agree with you about showing respect to volunteers and other workers. Not only the listeners that the Singapore PM showed respect, he also gives credit to health care workers that are dedicated to fighting COVID-19.

[Arwin Jerome Manalo Onda]

Based on the CERC principles, here are my comparisons on the two speeches made:

1. Be first – Despite limited information, the Singapore PM explains the facts at hand (eg, mortality rate, transmission rate). The US President made a national address after the WHO declared that COVID-19 pandemic, which was in March 2020. In contrary, the Singapore PM made a statement in February 2020, a month before global declaration of the pandemic.

2. Be right – The Singapore government utilizes the respective departments for expertise advice and actionable points. He also discussed some preventive measures to combat the disease based on basic public health hygiene. Likewise, the US President expressed the consultative process on dealing with the infection.

3. Be credible – As a prime minister, he himself is credible enough to speak about the COVID-19 situation in Singapore. In addition, he made statements that are based on facts only and did not speculate. Likewise, the US President expressed the consultative process on dealing with the infection.

4. Express empathy – The Singapore PM delivered his message with reassurance that there is no need to hoard supplies as he believes that they can control the virus, but should involve public cooperation. He didn’t belittle the gravity of the situation and understood the panic brought about by the new virus. I noticed that he expressed empathic statements on the last portion of his national address.

The US President’s voice and intonation made it seemed obvious he was reading a script. This decreases the level of empathy during the delivery of the speech. More importantly, he was over-reassuring that the situation is and will be under control. The emotions felt lacking when he said that Americans will rise up to the situation.

5. Promote action – Singapore PM informs the public that they are doing their best on the COVID-19, citing examples from previous outbreaks such as SARS-CoV in 2004. He also assured sufficient supplies and manpower to face the new coronavirus. He also explained the conditions for hospital admission: people are encouraged to visit the hospital experiencing serious and critical conditions.

The US President narrated several action points regarding prevention, what has been done, what currently is being done, what actions are to be imposed in the future. The US President dwelled on this principle mostly.

6. Show respect – The Singapore PM delivered his message with utmost respect. His tone and modulation had resounding reassurance that no matter what happens, the Singapore government will be there to provide assistance. The US President, however, had thrown some banter against other regions (eg, China, EU) on their response to the COVID-19 situation.

Overall, the Singaporean PM addressed the nation ticking off the list of the principles of Crisis and Emergency Response Communication (CERC). This made his address memorable and reassuring to his people.

[Theekhathat Huapai]

Regarding public addressing between two leaders, Donald Trump from the USA and Lee Hsien Loong from Singapore. We can summarize the difference between two leaders according to The six principles of CERC from CDC as stated below.

1. Be first
– Singapore’s leader declared to the public concerning COVID-19 infection as soon as a week after the disease had been disseminated.
– The USA’s leader addressed the public after the disease spread around the world.

2. Be right
– Singapore’s leader came up with basic knowledge of the disease by comparing SARS and COVID-19, preventive measures, current insight into vaccine and drug development.
– The USA’s leader underestimated the severity of the disease; hence a younger generation did not seem aware of COVID-19 spreading.

3. Be credible
– Singapore’s leader had a natural tone when he stated to the public. He had maintained eye contact with the listener all the time. This may seem to be credible even though his staff might write this script.
– The USA’s leader seems like he read the script. The contain of his speech has some credible data. But he was always comparing with adversaries. This situation led to distrust in those countries.

4. Express empathy
– Singapore’s leader expressed an empathic message to Singapore’s people and other countries affected by COVID-19 infection.
– The USA’s leader always compares with other countries. The expression of his concern was neutral when he talked to his people. But he said aggressively when he compared with other countries.

5. Promote action
– Singapore’s leader did not just declare an outbreak. But he also told the listener about what the situation will become worse, how to prevent the spreading of the disease with plain language.
– The USA’s leader told the listener only a mandatory action by the government. But did not tell the listener how to protect themself from the disease.

6. Show respect
– Singapore’s leader showed respect to the medical personnel who work at the frontline and people who protect themself and other people from the disease.
– The USA’s leader did not mention frontline health workers. He also showed disrespect toward adversaries.

[Navin Prasai]

While addressing the nation on the COVID-19 both the leaders, PM Lee Hsien Loong and President Trump included six principles of CERC. Most of the time President Trump was focused on the immediate restrictions of the visitors from China and Europe whereas PM Lee emphasized the scientific facts, compared to SARS, and expressed empathy by explaining how the country was well prepared to fight against COVID-19.

[Karina Dian Lestari]

TMHG528 Disease Surveillance and Public Health Investigation › Week 4 Topic discussion 1
Please watch VDOs of public communication regarding COVID-19 situation from the leaders of two countries: Singapore and the USA. Then try to observe whether the two leaders are good communicators or not. When watching the VDOs try to look for the six principles of CREC, recommended by the CDC:

1. Be first:
Both Singaporean PM and President of USA promptly shares the information of current situation of COVID-19 in their country, but Singaporean PM is quicker telling the public compared to the President of US.

2. Be right:
Both Singaporean PM and President of USA shares credible information of what is known. Although, in my opinion, Singaporean PM has given clearer and more detail information on what is unknown.

3. Be credible:
Both Singaporean PM and President of USA given credible scientific evidence to encourage public trust their information.

4. Express empathy:
Both Singaporean PM and President of USA expressed empathy. However, Singaporean PM approach in expressing the empathy makes me, as the audience, believe that he does care about the public concern and fear.

5. Promote action:
Both Singaporean PM and President of USA promote action for public to help in stopping the spread of Covid-19.

6. Show respect:
Singaporean PM showed more respectful speech to the audience compared to the President of USA. The president of USA often talked about the other country fault which, in my opinion, is not necessary.

[Napisa Freya Sawamiphak]

I agree that it seems not appropriate that US President often talked about the other country fault. It could create negative feedback and lower credible/trustfulness.

[Ashaya.i]

Based on the the six principles of CREC, recommended by the CDC, the public communication from two leaders have the difference at some points as below;

1. Be first: Singapore leader showed the response against COVID-19 and also provided the information of the disease promptly within two week after faced with COVID-19 situation while the US president tend to have lesser prompt reaction.
2. Be Right: Both leaders shared the accurate information about COVID-19 according to the real situation. Singapore leader also showed the gap among tracing to the source of the infection while the US leader focusing on the source of outbreak causing by outside of the country.
3. Be Credible: Singapore leader emphasized on the evidence of the disease and in my opinion, his body language create the trustworthiness to his citizen. Also, the US leader showed that the action from US government is reliable.
4. Express Empathy: Singapore leader has showed the empathy by focusing on mental health of the people and encourage them to pass the situation together. US leader focused on financial relieve for his citizen and also the economic aspect.
5. Promote Action: Both leaders showed the action that the government was performed and provided to control of the disease including shared the disease preventive methods in personal level.
6. Show Respect: Singapore leader did not blame any particular group of the outbreak and he also mentioned about the healthcare workers and the other workers that provide the diverse services to the Singaporean. His action showed the respect of their citizen in all level. The US president seems to had criticized the other country about their action to prevent the disease.

[TARO KITA]

The following are my observation on the messages delivered by the two leaders based on the Six Principles of CREC

1.Be First
Singapore: The PM’s message was released about two weeks after the onset of the outbreak.
The USA: The President’s message was released after the situation worsened and the WHO declared it a global pandemic.

2.Be Right:
Singapore: The PM tried to explain the scientific facts and figures of COVID19, including possible negative prospects and stricter measures.
The USA: The President explained in detail their responses to the outbreak, and prospects which were mostly positive.

3.Be Credible:
Singapore: The PM explained the situation of the outbreak, their response, and readiness in a way that the listener would sense his confidence and sincerity.
The USA: The President expressed his confidence that the outbreak can be contained, while attributing it to inadequate responses by foreign countries.

4.Express Empathy:
Singapore: The PM tried to unite the Singaporeans by referring to their previous experience of SARS, while expressing his empathy for the fear that people must be feeling.
The USA: The President tried to unite, and encourage people by sharing their economic success.

5.Promote Action:
The both leaders’ messages were very clear about what they wanted people to do and not to do.

6.Show Respect:
Singapore: The PM expressed his respect to volunteers, healthcare workers and other people who support the society during the difficult time.
The USA: The President’s message showed respect for the health professionals.

[Napisa Freya Sawamiphak]

1. Be first: Singapore PM provided response fast within two weeks after COVID-19 situation occurrence. Whereas US President responded slower than Singapore, when situation was getting worse and after WHO declaration of COVID-19 as a global pandemic.
2. Be Right: I think both Singapore PM and US President provided accurate information, but I like the Singapore PM’s style using information from experts to plan the control/preventive measures. It could provide more insights and create awareness to audiences.
3. Be Credible: Singapore PM provided informative and trustful messages based on facts, together with the body language and his authority, it created trust and confidence to the audiences. US President also showed the credible data as well, but he usually read scripts.
4. Express Empathy: Singapore PM spoke with soft and caring tone while encouraging people to fight the situation together and also provided the confidence to control the situation. US President seemed to focus on other issue than focusing on people.
5. Promote Action: Both leaders did well in promoting action. They mentioned action plan to handle the situation.
6. Show Respect: Singapore PM talked about working team (e.g. healthcare workers). His statement and voice tone showed the respect of their citizen. US president criticized against other country on their COVID-19 response.

[Anawat ratchatorn]

1. Be First : Both of PMs fast response during pandemic. Singapore’s PM did it faster within 2 wks after the outbreak occur. US President response during the worsening of COVID19 outbreak.

2. Be Right : Both give accurate data about the current situation, cause, and scientific fact. In my opinion, Singapore’s PM give information in more detailed and give more necessary and precise information than the US.

3. Be Credible : The Singapore’s PM explain the plan in detail and use a trustful posture and body language. While the US president also express the trustful communication with strong confidence.

4. Express Empathy : Both shown empathy to audience by mention about people and how to help them. But, personally, voice tone and posture of the Singapore’s PM was more soft and kind that make us feel more comfortable that the US President.

5. Promote Action : Both explained the plan and how to complete it with confidence and very clear.

6. Show Respect : The Singapore’s PM didn’t do any harm with his word. But The US President may spoke some negative aspect to some specific group. However, both gave respects to the main audience ‘people’.

[Saranath]

Great! If you have a chance to make or write a speech for public response to an outbreak, please follow these guidelines!

[Tossapol Prapassaro]

According to PM Lee Hsien Loong and President Donald Trump address on the COVID-19 situation
1. Be first
PM Lee Hsien Loong: He gives a formal speech to the public quite early after outbreak (2 weeks).
President Donald Trump: He gives a formal speech to the public quite late after the outbreak (March 11), which is the day WHO officially states the global pandemic.

2. Be Right
PM Lee Hsien Loong: He gives the correct information directly to the public, stating where they are and what may lie ahead. He mentions that the new virus is more infectious than SARS, which makes them harder to stop from spreading, and he also said that the new virus is much less dangerous than SARS (0.2 % death rate from the new virus compared to 10% death rate from SARS)
President Donald Trump: He gives the correct information about the situation of the COVID-19 outbreak that already hit the United States; however, he underestimates the potential of disease spreading and the threat of the disease by using the phrase “The vast majority of Americans: The risk is very, very low….”. He also blamed European Union for failing to restrict the outbreak, which may not be the right thing to address.

3. Be credible
PM Lee Hsien Loong: He honestly gives the information that they have some case that cannot be traced to the source of infection, which mean that the virus is probably circulating in the population. However, he also mentions the measurements to contain those spread.
President Donald Trump: The way he spoke was overconfident “Our team is the best anywhere in the world…” or “No nation is more prepared or more resilient than the United States.”, which I think makes his speech untrustworthy.

4. Express Empathy
PM Lee Hsien Loong: He shows empathy by mentioning that he knows everyone might feel fear and anxiety, which is a typical human reaction, and everyone wants to protect themselves and their family. Furthermore, the content of his speech, tone, and gesture also expresses his empathy to the audience.
President Donald Trump: His speech and his tone did not acknowledge the suffering of people as much as they should. He did not share his feeling about the situation sincerely.

5. Promote action
PM Lee Hsien Loong: He shows how the government is prepared, including adequate supplies of masks and PPE, expanded and upgraded medical facilities, advanced research capabilities, and well-trained doctors and nurses. He also mentions strategies to control imported cases by discovering the cases, isolating the patients, contacting tracing and quarantine measurement to contain the spread.
President Donald Trump: He already mentions the measures, including financial aspects, supporting CDC, supporting vaccines, treatments, and distributing medical supplies.

6. Show respect
PM Lee Hsien Loong: He shows respect to a group of people that work for the public, including volunteers that distribute masks to households, university students delivering food daily to school mate, health care workers treating the patients, business federation, union, and public transport workers that maintain their service to keep Singapore running.
President Donald Trump: His speech did not show respect or acknowledgment to his volunteer or co-worker as much as it should be.

To be summarized, PM Lee Hsien Loong gave a very excellent speech that included all aspects of the principles of CERC, which is a superb example of what a leader should do during a crisis. Contrast to President Trump that quite arrogant, blaming and underestimating the situation.

[Author]

Posts