Short abstract:

My Paper Examines the public discourse on COVID-19 vaccinations in Germany. Through the lens of moral anthropology, it looks at the discursive structure and asks about the implementation of ethical regimes in public health policy

Long abstract:

The discourse surrounding COVID-19 vaccination in Germany is characterized by a profound dichotomy. It oscillates between viewing vaccinations as the societal savior from a threatening disease to perceiving them as a technology entangled in government conspiracies, potentially harming the individual's freedom. This complex narrative is deeply embedded in the biopolitics of the state and the bio-governmentality of the people during times of crisis.

My research delves into the concept of "regimes of living," exploring the heterogeneous and unstable configuration of norms employed in public health communication. Drawing inspiration from Lakoff and Collier, I aim to unravel how ethical regimes and answers to the question of how one should live are interwoven with the discourse on vaccinations.

Leveraging a comprehensive dataset comprising over a hundred newspaper articles, talk show transcripts, and media posts, my discourse analysis identifies moral categories associated with vaccination. The findings illuminate the terms used to discuss vaccinations and reveal the diverse voices shaping conversations about vaccination security or side effects.

Taking a moral anthropology approach (Laidlaw), I extend my investigation beyond polarized discussions by incorporating ethnographic data from medical practitioners and post-vaccination patients. This research not only highlights existing moral categories and communities surrounding vaccinations but also aims to contribute to a more engaged anthropology, exploring how we can shape future discourses on vaccination.