The Covid-19 pandemic in Ghana: exploring the discourse strategies in president Nana Addo's speeches

The study investigates how Ghana’s President Nana Akufo-Addo framed and communicated Covid-19 measures during the critical early phase of the pandemic. Set against the global and national impacts of Covid-19 and Ghana’s high vaccine hesitancy, the paper emphasizes the importance of transparent and effective crisis communication to build trust and compliance. It asks: (a) What discourse strategies did the president employ to make the audience receptive to Covid-19 measures? and (b) What motivated these discursive approaches given Ghana’s historical, social, and political contexts? The work highlights that framing, legitimation, and context shape public adherence, and ineffective communication risks confusion and poor health outcomes.

The paper engages with context (social, political, historical, cognitive) as outlined by the discourse-historical approach (DHA), crisis communication theory, and framing theory. It draws on literature emphasizing the role of transparent crisis communication in building trust and adherence, and shows that crisis responses are political acts shaped by values and contexts. Framing is treated as selective salience to highlight problems and guide moral evaluation. DHA is used to consider intertextuality, institutional frames, and broader socio-political histories. Prior studies show widespread war metaphors and moral appeals in pandemic discourse, the role of nationalism and solidarity in mobilization, and the mixed effects of sanctions and militarized language. In Ghana, prior work examined education impacts, policy response, decision-making, and blame, but little addressed discursive strategies in presidential Covid-19 speeches. The Ghanaian context section outlines the nation’s five objectives in fighting Covid-19 and the timeline of restrictions, closures, border control, partial lockdowns, and social interventions, situating the communicative strategies within national history, politics, and religion.

Data comprised transcripts of the first ten presidential Covid-19 update speeches (March 11–May 31, 2020): March 11, 15, 21, 27; April 5, 9, 19, 26; May 10, 31. Transcripts were copied into Microsoft Word. The team conducted qualitative content and thematic analyses: initial thorough reading and inductive coding identified topics such as infection rates, preventive protocols, frontline workers, PPEs, restrictions, contact tracing, policies, donations, financial assistance, lockdowns, and transportation. Codes were grouped into categories (e.g., virus prevention, government support, citizens’ responsibility, essential services, infection statistics, international solidarity, motivations). Guided by prior literature (e.g., war metaphors, emotional appeals, relief), the authors re-coded to capture Ghana-specific themes (e.g., enemy, defeat the virus, love for country, make a sacrifice). Keywords and phrases were searched using the Word find function to determine frequencies, which informed theme construction (e.g., framing Covid-19 as war, encouraging nationalism and patriotism). Frequency tables were created for keywords. Interpretation drew on DHA textual techniques, considering co-text, intertextuality, and broader socio-political-historical context.

Five discourse strategy themes were identified: 1) Framing Covid-19 as a war: Frequent war-related expressions included fight virus (30), contain virus (21), protect people/life (20), defeat virus (17), die/died/death (16), battle (12), combat virus (9), our safety/safeguard (7), halt virus spread (5), prevent virus (5), our survival (4), the enemy (4). Speeches emphasized protecting frontline workers, unity against a common enemy, the front door as a battle line, and prioritizing lives over livelihoods. 2) Encouraging nationalism and patriotism: Expressions included Ghanaians rise to the occasion (21), make sacrifice (13), un/patriotic (12), be united (7), freedom (6), proud as Ghanaian (5), love for country (4), look out for each other (4), courage of Ghanaians (3). The president invoked collective identity (we/us), historical struggles (slavery, imperialism, colonialism), and solidarity to legitimize compliance. 3) Showing appreciation and gratitude: Expressions included I thank you (22), I/we appreciate (8), I/we are grateful (5), I say ayekoo (4). Appreciation targeted citizens, frontline healthcare workers, security services, and media, often preceding requests for continued compliance. 4) Threatening sanctions: Lower-frequency enforcement language appeared, e.g., laws are in force/enforced (9), you will be dealt with (5), police arrest (5), flout regulations (3), sanctions will apply (2). Threats highlighted potential consequences for individuals and institutions violating measures, while down-toners were used when referencing security excesses. 5) Appealing to religious values: Religious references included Allah/God/grace of God (21), Religion/religious (19), Muslim/mosque/Islam (17), Christian/church/Christianity (14), pray/prayer/w worship/fasting (11), Easter/Ramadan (6), Prophet/Jesus Christ (5). The president declared a national day of prayer and fasting and used religious texts and events (Easter, Ramadan) to legitimize staying home and compliance.

The identified strategies address the research questions by showing how war metaphors, nationalism/patriotism, appreciation, selective sanction threats, and religious appeals were mobilized to legitimize and encourage adherence to Covid-19 measures. War framing positioned the pandemic as a national security crisis, justifying restrictive measures and emphasizing mortality risks, consistent with global patterns. Nationalism and patriotism strengthened solidarity and in-group identity through plural voice, historical references, and shared values, motivating collective compliance. Appreciation and heroization of frontline workers fostered mutual trust and willingness to endure restrictions, though such hero discourse may normalize risk exposure. Sanction discourse was used sparingly, influenced by legal timing and electoral considerations, balancing enforcement with empathy to avoid backlash and preserve legitimacy. Religious framing leveraged Ghana’s religiosity to motivate moral responsibility and observance of measures across faiths. Collectively, these discourses align with crisis communication principles of legitimation, trust-building, and context-sensitive framing, with implications for managing compliance and addressing vaccine hesitancy.

The study analyzed ten early Covid-19 speeches by Ghana’s president and identified five discourse strategies: war framing, nationalism/patriotism appeals, appreciation/gratitude, sanction threats, and religious appeals. These were interpreted through context, crisis communication theory, and framing, illustrating how legitimation strategies supported government measures and public compliance. Implications for crisis management include leveraging national identity and moral appeals while balancing enforcement to mitigate resistance and support interventions such as vaccination. Future research should analyze audiovisual delivery (intonation, gestures), include more speeches, examine code-switching between Ashanti Twi and English, and consider media discourse to capture additional communicative strategies.

The analysis relied on written transcripts only, excluding audio-visual elements such as intonation, posture, facial expressions, and gestures. It covered only the first ten speeches and did not analyze code-switching or broader media coverage, potentially overlooking non-linguistic and intermedial communicative effects.