Dynamics and Motivation of Online Pro- and Anti-vaccination Lobbyists in Nigeria: A Qualitative Exploration

This paper highlights the issue of anti-vaccination lobbyists in Nigeria, who use online networks and discussion groups to spread misinformation about the polio vaccination. The paper seeks to shed some light on the motivations of online vaccine antagonists, and investigates strategies to counter the spread of misinformation and convert online antagonists into pro-vaccination lobbyists.    

As stated in the paper, “The use of information and communication technologies (ICTs) and social media as sources and platforms for sharing misinformation about immunization is a common phenomenon worldwide”.  Misinformation on polio immunisation spread through online networks poses additional challenges to polio vaccination campaigns in Nigeria, which are already facing mistrust from communities in some areas. This fear and distrust can discourage parents from vaccinating their children, and community leaders from supporting campaigns in their wards. 

The author of this paper, an online pro-vaccine lobbyist himself, studied vaccine related postings into online groups and conducted focus group discussion (FDGs) and key informant interviews (KIIs) with anti-vaccine lobbyists,  as well as with online network members who had converted to become pro-vaccination advocates.

The author describes the nature of the online groups and give some insight into the characteristics of the anti-vaccine lobbyists. As stated in the paper, “Observations from monitoring online discussions and FGDs revealed that online anti-vaccination lobbyists are a heterogeneous group. Some of them work in the health care sector, in government hospitals or in Local Government departments, but they are rarely frontline health workers.  Some work in non-health-related state and federal ministries and parastatals.”  The paper also points out that some of them are just people who are knowledgeable (or believe themselves to be knowledgeable) about many issues related to health, politics, and the economy.

The research also showed that while many truly believe that they are contributing to the greater good by sharing their views on polio vaccination, some are also participating in online groups and contributing their views about polio because they are motivated by the need for recognition and the possibility of financial gain (like through adhoc or full time engagement in immunization work). 

When investigating what factors changed the views of anti-vaccination lobbyists, FGDs with online group members who had been converted and successfully engaged as vaccination advocates revealed that having one’s own child or becoming a caregiver of a child who needs vaccination often leads anti-vaccination lobbyists to see the potential benefits of vaccinations. More specifically, the FGDs with pro-vaccination advocates who used to oppose polio vaccinations showed how specific information and arguments caused them to change their views.  The paper provides a detailed table of factors that influenced an anti-vaccination opinion, such as rumoured anti-fertility effects of vaccines, and too much perceived focus on the polio vaccine at the expense of other vaccinations, and outlines the specific knowledge and arguments which led them to change their views on that issue.   

The paper concludes with a set of recommendations for further action. For example, it highlights the need for national and international mapping of online pro- and anti-vaccination lobbyists in order to identify and engage them more effectively.  There is also a need to support pro-vaccination lobbyists with information and skills to strengthen their online interactions with the anti-vaccination lobbyists, who are often more numerous and more fanatical about their views.  Steps should also be taken to make information that addresses the many misconceptions about vaccination widely available to the general public, healthcare workers, and academics so they can also be in a position to challenge the views of their peers.  

Editor's note: This paper was submitted to the new open access journal Global Health Communication (GHC) as part of a United States Agency for International Development (USAID)-funded initiative to ensure that academics and practitioners from a range of countries, including those facing the greatest polio and routine immunisation challenges, are supported in getting their research peer reviewed, published, and widely disseminated.  Although not all papers were published in the GHC journal, The Communication Initiative (a partner in this initiative) worked with some of the authors to adapt their papers for publication on The CI website.