Image restoration strategies in pandemic crisis communication: a comparative analysis of Chinese and American COVID-19 political speeches

The COVID-19 pandemic significantly impacted the global political landscape, demanding effective crisis communication from world leaders. Their speeches played a crucial role in managing public opinion, expectations, and actions. This study focuses on the communication strategies of top leaders in China and the United States, two nations with a complex and strained bilateral relationship further complicated by the pandemic. Existing literature lacks a comprehensive comparative analysis of their pandemic-related speeches, particularly concerning image restoration. This research uses corpus-assisted discourse analysis and Image Repair Theory (IRT) to investigate the image restoration strategies employed by these leaders, examining how these strategies contributed to their respective narratives and offering insights into effective crisis management.

Existing research on crisis communication and pandemic communication has primarily focused on individual case studies of leaders from various nations (Nigeria, Israel, the UK, Australia, and the US). Studies analyzing American leaders' discourse often concentrate on Donald Trump's ineffective communication and the strategies of other governors, while analyses of Chinese communication often utilize critical discourse and metaphor analysis. While some studies have made comparative analyses between China and the US, these have been limited in scope and timeframe, often focusing on a narrow selection of texts. This study aims to address this gap by conducting a longitudinal and comparative analysis of a broader range of speeches from key political leaders in both countries, employing IRT as a theoretical framework.

This study employed a mixed-methods approach combining quantitative corpus-assisted analysis and qualitative content analysis informed by IRT. Two corpora were built using LancsBox 6.0 software: one containing 60 speeches from Chinese leaders (CCL) and another with 84 speeches from American leaders (CAL). Data was collected from official government websites, including press briefings and public addresses from March 2020 to December 2022. The quantitative analysis involved keyword and collocation analysis using LancsBox, identifying high-frequency words and their co-occurrences to understand prominent themes and linguistic features in each corpus. Qualitative analysis then used IRT to analyze selected speeches (20 from each corpus) to identify prevalent image restoration strategies. The qualitative analysis focused on identifying specific instances where leaders employed strategies such as denial, evasion, reducing offensiveness (bolstering, minimization, differentiation, transcendence, attacking the accuser), corrective action, and mortification. The analysis involved coding the selected speeches to identify and categorize these strategies.

Keyword analysis revealed distinct thematic differences between the CCL and CAL. The CCL focused on themes of geopolitical entities, development and cooperation, public health, and society/community, emphasizing China's responsible global role and economic priorities. The CAL focused on leadership and governance, public health, community impact, and global context/timeline, highlighting American leadership and the importance of vaccination. Collocation analysis of 'Chinese' and 'American' in their respective corpora further illuminated these differences, revealing distinct semantic domains. Qualitative analysis based on IRT identified three shared image restoration strategies: reducing offensiveness, mortification, and corrective action. Both Chinese and American leaders employed bolstering to emphasize past successes and positive attributes. However, the Chinese leaders frequently used differentiation to contrast current challenges with more severe historical events, while American leaders used minimization to downplay the severity of the situation. Mortification was implemented through expressions of empathy and concern, utilizing 'we' to emphasize shared responsibility and collective action. Corrective action involved outlining future plans and visions, with Chinese leaders emphasizing national resilience and global cooperation, while American leaders often shifted blame or highlighted specific policies and actions. A key difference was that Chinese leaders used the differentiation strategy whereas the American leaders focused on the minimization strategy. The American approach, especially under Trump, also involved accusations against China and other entities.

The findings highlight the distinct ways in which Chinese and American leaders utilized image restoration strategies to shape their pandemic narratives. China's emphasis on responsibility, cooperation, and historical context reflects its focus on projecting stability and a long-term vision. The United States, conversely, emphasized decisive leadership, technological advancement, and vaccination efforts, reflecting its focus on maintaining its global leadership role. The shared strategies (reducing offensiveness, mortification, and corrective action) indicate a universal need to manage public perception during a crisis, though the specific tactics employed vary according to national contexts and political ideologies. These findings contribute to our understanding of how national identity and political priorities shape crisis communication and image restoration.

This study provides a valuable comparative analysis of image restoration strategies employed by top leaders in China and the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic. The findings underscore the importance of understanding cultural and political contexts in shaping crisis communication. Future research could broaden the scope to include other countries, examine additional communication channels (social media), and investigate the long-term impact of these strategies on public opinion and international relations. Moreover, an interdisciplinary approach could enrich future research by incorporating insights from political science, public health, and crisis management.

This study's limitations include its focus on only two countries and a specific set of political leaders. The selection of speeches might not fully capture the diversity of communication strategies used by all leaders or across all communication platforms. The findings are therefore limited in their generalizability to other countries or contexts. Future research should expand the scope to include a more diverse range of countries and communication channels to improve the generalizability of the findings. Furthermore, incorporating interdisciplinary perspectives from fields like political science and public health would provide a richer, more comprehensive understanding of the impact of crisis communication strategies.