In August 2014, American news organizations faced a new story: Ebola, a disease that had been confined to West Africa, was now being treated on US soil. Public anxiety about the virus grew, and news outlets and social media users disagreed about how much alarm the situation warranted.
According to a Centers for Disease Control and Prevention study of US-focused news stories from July 1 to November 30, 2014, the first Ebola patient arrived in the United States on August 2. The World Health Organization declared a public health emergency of international concern on August 8. The first Ebola case diagnosed in the US came on September 30.
Coverage peaks as patients return
Foreign Policy, in an October 2014 analysis using data from the GDELT Project, described the arc of English-language coverage. The March 2014 outbreak announcement appeared as a small blip. Attention rose in late July, when news emerged that two Americans had been infected while providing medical care in Liberia.
Foreign Policy reported that coverage peaked in early August as the two were airlifted home for treatment. It then leveled off until Thomas Eric Duncan arrived in Dallas on September 20 and became the first Ebola patient diagnosed in the US.
The same analysis said experimental medications and specialized care became a focal point once the Americans were infected. It cited August CNN coverage that described “miraculous” new treatments. Its headline argued that the mainstream media had been “pretty levelheaded” once the data was counted.
Fear spreads on social media
Foreign Policy reported that Ebola fear intensified on Twitter in August and became a trending topic. It said misinformation on the platform had already been linked to at least two deaths. On August 10, Yahoo News’ official Twitter account was hacked and announced a nonexistent outbreak in Atlanta with 145 infections.
What researchers later found
Several academic studies later examined how the coverage framed the risk. The CDC’s Emerging Infectious Diseases journal published an analysis in January 2017. It found frequent use of risk-elevating messages in US news stories and said these may have contributed to increased public concern. The authors noted that news media had been blamed for sensationalizing Ebola and causing unnecessary alarm.
A study by Kilgo and colleagues, published in 2019, compared newspaper coverage with news shared on Reddit. It concluded that Reddit amplified panic and uncertainty, while newspaper coverage was significantly less likely to produce panic-inducing material.
A 2024 study in the journal Symbolic Interaction reviewed English-language headlines from May 2014 to January 2015. It found explicit fear language, such as “fear,” “terror” or “panic,” in roughly 10 percent of hand-coded headlines. It found no statistical difference between newspaper and web-based publications.
A separate PLOS ONE study looked at Ebola-related internet searches and Twitter activity over the six weeks ending October 31, 2014. It also counted Ebola news videos on two major TV news networks. It tested whether news coverage was a significant factor in the timing of the searches and tweets.
Local officials respond to public worry
Public concern also reached local news. WBUR in Boston reported in October 2014 that fear of Ebola in Massachusetts might be more troubling than preparing for possible cases. This followed word that a Braintree patient was being screened. The station reported that Boston’s interim public health commissioner said a person had to be within three feet of someone showing symptoms to be at risk.
FAQ
When did Ebola coverage first peak in the US?
Foreign Policy’s analysis of GDELT data placed the first peak in early August 2014, when two Americans infected in Liberia were flown home for treatment. A second rise followed when the first Ebola patient was diagnosed in the US in late September.
Did research find that media coverage drove fear?
Findings varied. The CDC-affiliated analysis found frequent risk-elevating messages in US news stories. The 2019 study found newspaper coverage less panic-inducing than news shared on Reddit.