Government Crisis Communication and Politicization - A Cross-National Comparative Study of Communication Frameworks in Democratic Countries During COVID-19

Abstract

Aim/research problem: What are the characteristics of politicized framing strategies in government crisis communication during the COVID-19 pandemic across different democratic regimes? Theory: Framing Theory; Democratic Theory Methods: Content Analyses Material: official communication materials from three governments between January 2020 and January 2021 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (mainly the text manuscripts of press conferences and the written records of press conferences) Results: A comparative analysis of COVID-19 press briefings from the U.S., Germany, and Japan governments show clear differences in crisis communication strategies. In the U.S., communication was highly politicized. Attribution and responsibility frames dominated, combining performance claims with blame-shifting tactics. Communication primarily served campaign goals rather than collaborative governance. Germany, highlighted action frames rooted in institutional discourse. Communication aimed to build consensus and legitimize policy through cooperation, and scientific authority. Japan tends to use affective frame with messaging relied on polite, request-based expressions, emphasizing social trust, public ethics, and emotional resonance. Though less overtly politicized, Japan’s approach built affective legitimacy through empathy and moral responsibility. In short, while all three are democracies, their institutional structures and political cultures shaped distinct pathways for politicization in crisis communication.