Thesis title: AN ETHICAL FRAMEWORK WITHIN WHICH TO UPHOLD EPISTEMIC STANDARDS DURING A PUBLIC HEALTH CRISIS: LESSONS LEARNED FROM COVID 19
Abstract
The COVID-19 pandemic exposed deep ethical tensions in how science is communicated amid uncertainty, politicization, and digitally accelerated misinformation. This thesis develops a comprehensive ethical framework to uphold epistemic standards in future public-health crises, interpreted throughout through Practical Ethics and Virtue Epistemology. It is a qualitative study subdivided into four main case studies: (A) a systematic literature review mapping 46 peer-reviewed studies and showing that explicit, rigorous ethical analysis of pandemic science communication was scarce and geographically skewed; (B) semi-structured interviews with practitioners in Italy and Argentina, revealing ad-hoc moral reasoning under pressure and recurring dilemmas around uncertainty disclosure, persuasion versus autonomy, and testimonial justice; (C) an in-depth content analysis of YouTube, Facebook, and Twitter policies, highlighting inconsistent articulation of responsibility, over-reliance on procedural enforcement, and contested boundaries between moderation and suppression of legitimate dissent; and (D) a media analysis of the Bergamo vs Comitato Tecnico case, illustrating how journalistic framings of secrecy, blame, and transparency shape public expectations and trust. Across A–D, results converge on the need for proportionate, context-sensitive standards that integrate role-responsibility, transparency-with-accountability, pluralism without epistemic laxity, and cultivation of intellectual virtues (humility, courage, honesty). These findings inform the final framework: a multi-level set of epistemic standards and process modules specifying duties for scientists, decision-makers, media, and platforms, with practical guidance for resolving value conflicts while preserving trustworthy, just, and effective communication during crises.