Convincing for the good cause? Techniques of public health communication and their ethical implications

Abstract

Definition of the Problem: Public health communication is aimed at large groups of populations with a spectrum of communicative techniques. However, current approaches rarely scrutinize the normative implications and the moral threshold with this spectrum. The contribution develops minimum conditions for health communication’s ethical acceptability. Arguments: First, by using a recent example, it is demonstrated how image and text are used in an attempt to convince the public of adopting a certain health behavior. Second, the international ethical debate is analyzed to reconstruct five basic types of techniques in health communication (information, argumentation, persuasion, manipulation, and coercion) which are discussed with regard to their implications for means, ends, and consequences for recipients as well as their implications for autonomy. Third, ethical pitfalls are discussed using the ambivalent technique of persuasion as an example. Conclusion: We argue that it is important to differentiate between techniques of health communication when it comes to sensitive topics of bioethics. Furthermore, we argue that health communication should allow for a fair and transparent discussion involving the broader population.