Start Date
26-5-2026 4:00 PM
End Date
26-5-2026 4:15 PM
Description
Panic buying during Covid was a crisis of perception as much as supply. This paper builds on the mixed method content analysis of 209 articles and accompanying images from six high circulation English newspapers, March to July 2020, setting it in the context of calls for civil food resilience and the UK national food strategy. The research shows how the press framed food access, responsibility and risk at a pivotal turning point. Sensationalised language appeared in 89% of articles, 68% carried negative sentiment, and 64% of analysed images showed empty shelves. Supermarkets were the dominant voice, quoted in 62% of coverage, while government and community perspectives were comparatively muted. Contradictions were common, with reassurances of no shortages printed alongside imagery that signalled scarcity. Using agenda setting and framing theory, this paper demonstrates how coverage elevated supermarkets as feeding the nation, personalised blame onto consumers, and sidelined alternative food networks and mutual aid. Yet the same evidence points to hope. It reveals practical levers to reduce harm in future shocks linked to climate disruption, conflict or political instability. The paper proposes a reporting framework for crises that limits scarcity cues, avoids naming and shaming, aligns government, retailer and media messaging, and consistently signposts support for vulnerable groups. Reading panic buying as both crisis and opportunity, the paper argues for proactive collaboration between policymakers, editors and retailers to build consistent communication, protect those at greatest risk, and strengthen food system resilience before the next disruption.
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-Share Alike 4.0 International License.
Included in
Crisis, Hope and The Headline: Agenda Setting in England’s Covid Food Story
Panic buying during Covid was a crisis of perception as much as supply. This paper builds on the mixed method content analysis of 209 articles and accompanying images from six high circulation English newspapers, March to July 2020, setting it in the context of calls for civil food resilience and the UK national food strategy. The research shows how the press framed food access, responsibility and risk at a pivotal turning point. Sensationalised language appeared in 89% of articles, 68% carried negative sentiment, and 64% of analysed images showed empty shelves. Supermarkets were the dominant voice, quoted in 62% of coverage, while government and community perspectives were comparatively muted. Contradictions were common, with reassurances of no shortages printed alongside imagery that signalled scarcity. Using agenda setting and framing theory, this paper demonstrates how coverage elevated supermarkets as feeding the nation, personalised blame onto consumers, and sidelined alternative food networks and mutual aid. Yet the same evidence points to hope. It reveals practical levers to reduce harm in future shocks linked to climate disruption, conflict or political instability. The paper proposes a reporting framework for crises that limits scarcity cues, avoids naming and shaming, aligns government, retailer and media messaging, and consistently signposts support for vulnerable groups. Reading panic buying as both crisis and opportunity, the paper argues for proactive collaboration between policymakers, editors and retailers to build consistent communication, protect those at greatest risk, and strengthen food system resilience before the next disruption.