A Content Analysis of Newspaper Coverage of Proposed Aerial Spraying with Naled in Puerto Rico during the Zika epidemic in 2016

Theoretical Background and research questions/hypothesis:

As part of the 2016 Zika outbreak response, the CDC and the government of Puerto Rico (PR) supported implementing an aerial spraying campaign with Naled as a way to control the mosquito vector that transmits the virus. Because of strong community opposition, the intervention was not implemented. The purpose of this study is to learn from this experience and to identify the information the public needs when a new mosquito control method is introduced to the population. Our objectives were to (1) identify stakeholders and spokespersons that supported or opposed to aerial spraying with Naled, (2) list journalists that covered aerial spraying, (3) describe the information that local newspapers presented about aerial spraying with Naled and, (4) analyze the public’s opinion on aerial spraying with Naled. This important information will inform how CDC-funded vector control programs in PR going forward engage communities to implement novel vector control interventions.

Methods:

We conducted a content analysis in three main PR newspapers that covered the Naled aerial spraying proposal during the 2016 Zika epidemic from June-August 2016. Selection of newspaper articles and categories was based on study objectives. We conducted a quantitative and qualitative analysis of data to answer the study objectives.

Results:

We analyzed 124 articles and 1,661 extracts, in which 36 journalists and news agencies covered aerial spraying with Naled. Federal and local government officials were spokespersons that supported aerial spraying with Naled, while health professionals, academics, scientists, politicians, environmental, agriculture and independent groups organized the United Front against Aerial Spraying (FUCFA) opposed to the spraying. Government spokespersons used traditional and social media, press conferences, public hearings and judicial resolutions to inform the public about Naled aerial spraying. FUCFA conducted six massive demonstrations to communicate its opposition. Articles included information about Zika incidence, transmission modes and prevention. The articles also included the risks and effectiveness of aerial spraying with Naled and Bacillus thurigiensis isrealensis and previous use and results in PR and other countries. Attitudes reflected in newspaper articles and the public opinion were against Naled aerial spraying. Reasons for opposition were its effect to health, bees and the environment and lack of information from the government about Naled aerial spraying. In addition, the federal government did not alert the local government about the arrival of the Naled pesticide on the island, which further increased public opposition. Sentiments of fear and mistrust from the public were presented in newspaper articles.

Conclusions:

Although government officials promoted of aerial spraying with Naled, information was insufficient. The fumigation plan did not provide details about fumigation frequency and schedules, nor a risk mitigation strategy or communications plan to inform the community. The urgency of implementing Naled and the lack of information produced fear and opposition. Consequently, local government ultimately abstained from aerial spraying.

Implications for research and/or practice:

In Puerto Rico, dengue is endemic. Chikungunya and Zika have caused recent island-wide epidemics. Communicating effectively is necessary to gain the support of the population to test the effectiveness of novel Aedes aegypti control methods that will help prevent future epidemics.