ArticlePloS one2025
The portrayal of panic-buying and stockpiling in English newspapers during Covid, a mixed-method content analysis.
Article in PloS one, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- The representation of adolescent social media use: a systematic review and content analysis of UK newspaper articles.BMC public health · 2025Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Panic-buying and stockpiling during Covid disrupted the supply chain, causing food shortages and impacting the vulnerable. The government faced criticism for its lack of food system resilience, poor communications planning, and reliance on retailers. The British media frequently reported on panic-buying during early lockdown stages in 2020 and throughout Covid. The media play an important role in communicating information to the British public during times of crisis and influence public opinion. This mixed-method study examined English media portrayal of panic-buying, analysing text and visual data from six of the highest-circulating newspapers from March to July 2020. It reviewed reporting trends, use of imagery, themes, and prominent stakeholder voices. Content analysis of 209 articles showed that coverage was dominated by popular and left-wing press, with 89% of articles using sensationalised language and 68% coded as negative. In a subset of 125 articles, visual imagery showed empty shelves in 64% of analysed images, reinforcing the impression of food shortages. Supermarkets were the most quoted stakeholders, appearing in 62% of articles. Contradictions included reports of no food shortages alongside images of empty shelves and early newspaper advice encouraging stockpiling. Reporting peaked between March 16-22, 2020. Six key themes were identified: supermarket prominence, food supply/access, food policy, individual behaviour, socio-economic impacts, and panic-buying drivers-all themes had relevance to food system resilience. Future civil unrest linked to food-system challenges, potentially driven by climate change, conflict, or political instability, could see panic-buying play a significant role. Research on media portrayals of panic-buying can help policymakers enhance communication strategies and identify critical issues during crises. The Covid pandemic revealed crucial lessons about the media's potential role in shaping public behaviour, highlighting the need for stronger government communication and collaboration with both the media and retailers to ensure consistent messaging, particularly to protect vulnerable groups.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.