“China virus”, the Chinese virus — at the start of the 2020 pandemic, you likely often encountered this epithet in the media. The use of geographically-based labels to define the disease (COVID-19) and the virus causing it (SARS-CoV-2) had significant consequences on public opinion, fueling and amplifying — sometimes with very serious outcomes — prejudices against specific people and countries, accused of having a causal role in spreading the contagion. The neutral designation COVID-19, proposed for the disease by the WHO in mid-February 2020, was quickly adopted globally. However, geographic names arose again with subsequent variants of the virus: in the media and in everyday language, people referred to the “Indian,” “British,” or “South African” variants, among others.
To counter this trend, in May 2021 the WHO introduced a nomenclature based on Greek letters — Alpha, Beta, Delta, etc. — completely neutral and free of geographic references. A study published in the Journal of Science Communication (JCOM) analyzed the impact of this change in the Australian media, showing that although the shift toward neutral names happened relatively quickly after the announcement, the positive effects in reducing potential stigma remained only partial.
This finding highlights the importance of expanding research on this topic, in order to establish effective communication guidelines within national and global pandemic response plans.
