@article{fdi:010076458,
  title = {{I}nformation circulation in times of {E}bola : {T}witter and the sexual transmission of {E}bola by survivors},
  author = {{M}orin, {C}. and {B}ost, {I}. and {M}ercier, {A}. and {D}ozon, {J}. and {A}tlani {D}uault, {L}a{\¨e}titia},
  editor = {},
  language = {{ENG}},
  abstract = {{I}ntroduction: {T}he 2013-2015 outbreak of {E}bola was by far the largest to date, affecting {G}uinea, {L}iberia, {S}ierra {L}eone, and secondarily, {N}igeria, {S}enegal and the {U}nited {S}tates. {S}uch an event raises questions about the circulation of health information across social networks. {T}his article presents an analysis of tweets concerning a specific theme: the sexual transmission of the virus by survivors, at a time when there was a great uncertainty about the duration and even the possibility of such transmission. {M}ethods: {T}his article combines quantitative and qualitative analysis. {F}rom a sample of 50,000 tweets containing the words "{E}bola" in {F}rench and {E}nglish, posted between {M}arch 15 and {N}ovember 8, 2014, we created a graphic representation of the number of tweets over time, and identified two peaks: the first between {J}uly 27 and {A}ugust 16, 2014 (633 tweets) and the second between {S}eptember 28 and {N}ovember 8, 2014 (2,577 tweets). {T}his sample was divided into two parts, and every accessible publication was analyzed and coded according to the authors' objectives, feelings expressed and/or publication type. {R}esults: {W}hile the results confirm the significant role played by mainstream media in disseminating information, media did not create the debate around the sexual transmission of {E}bola and {T}witter does not fully reflect mainstream media contents. {S}ocial media rather work like a "filter": in the case of {E}bola, {T}witter preceded and amplified the debate with focusing more than the mainstream media on the sexual transmission, as expressed in jokes, questions and criticism. {D}iscussion: {O}nline debates can of course feed on journalistic or official information, but they also show great autonomy, tinged with emotions or criticisms. {A}lthough numerous studies have shown how this can lead to rumors and disinformation, our research suggests that this relative autonomy makes it possible for {T}witter users to bring into the public sphere some types of information that have not been widely addressed. {O}ur results encourage further research to understand how this "filter" works during health crises, with the potential to help public health authorities to adjust official communications accordingly. {W}ithout a doubt, the health authorities would be well advised to put in place a special watch on the comments circulating on social media (in addition to that used by the health monitoring agencies).},
  keywords = {{GUINEE} ; {LIBERIA} ; {SIERRA} {LEONE} ; {NIGERIA} ; {SENEGAL} ; {ETATS} {UNIS}},
  booktitle = {},
  journal = {{P}lo{S} {C}urrents {O}utbreaks},
  volume = {28 août},
  numero = {publ. online},
  pages = {16  [en ligne]},
  ISSN = {2157-3999},
  year = {2018},
  DOI = {10.1371/currents.outbreaks.4e35a9446b89c1b46f8308099840d48f},
  URL = {https://www.documentation.ird.fr/hor/fdi:010076458},
}