Information in Times of Uncertainty

The crisis we are currently experiencing, the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic, is the first that we are facing globally as a digital, hyperconnected society. In view of this, there is a differentiating element that had not been presented before: the easy access to information that we have.

However, there is an irony in this ease with which we can acquire information, and that is that the existence of this information is not the same as the understanding and interpretation that we can make, and furthermore, the change of an idea that we may have. The latter is what I discuss in this text; that is, how, despite the multiple channels of information, expert voices, and institutions, are there people who still do not believe in the problem represented by the current pandemic?

There are two elements that I observe in this problem: the amount of existing information and the inability to change someone’s mind, both with the concept of information and the relationship it has with an event given by a probability. For the first problem, I use the mathematical model of information, proposed by Shannon and Weaver in 1949. In very general terms, in their mathematical model, they take into consideration four elements: sender, receiver, message, and noise (Gleick, 2011). Although its authors did not problematize much on the meaning of the message or its probable social aspect, it helps us to understand information from one of its main aspects: uncertainty. The greater the uncertainty, the greater the amount of information, and since the pandemic is currently a global problem with different nuances and channels, the information given daily exceeds our capacity to assimilate it.

A second problem, on which I dwell more, is that despite all the information available on the problem, there are those who doubt its existence. Considering then the human factor of the receiver and his capacity to acquire information, we are faced with a premise expressed by Marcey (1971): to strengthen an opinion, less information is required than to weaken it.

This premise takes into consideration the uncertainty of the object or event, and given the great uncertainty that exists, the amount of information that exists is too much, which generates a high probability that a certain event, whatever it may be, will happen. The more information there is, the more uncertainty there is, and the more difficult it will be to change an opinion. This, together with the proliferation of false information, makes it reasonable that there are people who do not believe in the current pandemic.

This understanding raises the question of whether a solution is possible. A viable strategy is followed by different social networks: publication filtering and optimized searches. However, this strategy does not take into account, at least in Mexico, a large part of the population that does not have the Internet and that their only source of information is interpersonal communication and social networks without as much openness as Whatsapp is.

For the time being, for this current crisis, there is no viable solution; however, as it is the first of many crises, it is necessary to have a communication strategy for the entire population, and to consider the greatest number of channels available.