Debating Crisis Policies: Narratives and Naturalization Processes in Belgium’s Public Discourse on COVID-19

With the linguistic turn in social sciences, discourse has increasingly been recognized as a fundamental dimension of social practices. Public discourse, viewed through this lens, operates as a dynamic space where narratives about specific policies are constructed, contested, and disseminated. Various actors engage in this space, striving to establish their preferred narrative as dominant. The consequences of these exchanges can profoundly impact the public understanding of policy issues, determine their salience, and legitimize certain policy approaches while marginalizing alternative perspectives. A central mechanism in this discursive struggle is the use of naturalization processes. Naturalization simplifies complex, multifaceted policy issues, presenting specific worldviews and policy stances as self-evident or beyond the domain of political deliberation. By obscuring their constructed and contestable nature, naturalized narratives can become deeply embedded in collective consciousness and shape societal norms and expectations. This paper examines how naturalization processes function within public discourse, focusing on the management of the COVID-19 pandemic in Belgium as a case study. In response to the significant risks posed by the virus, the Belgian government, like many others, introduced a series of unprecedented policies. Political leaders framed these measures as proportional responses to the crisis; yet such policies also sparked concerns about their democratic implications, fueling intense public debates. While these discussions were often steered by politicians, they also prominently featured scientific experts, who emerged as pivotal figures in managing the crisis. Consequently, COVID-19 policy became the subject of a complex interplay of diverse narratives reflecting distinct logics and perspectives. To explore these narratives, the paper conducts a critical analysis of speeches and statements by Belgian politicians and scientific experts. The analysis draws on transcripts from plenary sessions in federal and regional parliaments (Flanders, Wallonia, and Brussels), as well as statements published in four media outlets and shared on Twitter. Using Text-Oriented Discourse Analysis, the study uncovers the semiotic processes through which these actors constructed and promoted their perspectives. Specifically, it seeks to address the following research questions: what dominant narratives emerged in policy debates during the crisis? how were the crisis policies framed, legitimized, or contested in public discourse? in what ways did the discourse engage with the complex and multifaceted nature of the crisis? what processes of naturalization, and more broadly, complexity reduction, operated within these narratives? By answering these questions, the paper aims to contribute to Critical Policy Discourse Analysis by uncovering the mechanisms through which specific policy problems are constructed and legitimized within the public discourse.