Performing Authority in Times of Crisis: Six Frames of Contested Authority During the Pandemic Era in Finland

ABSTRACT The question of how authority is performed and gained is one of the classical puzzles in the study of politics. It is a particular salient question during crises when there are various types of societal reactions to the crisis. In this article, we study how public performances by pandemic authorities were evaluated during the intensive pandemic years 2020–2022 in Finland. We examine how unsuccessful pandemic authority was framed, focusing on instances where political or institutional authority was deemed unsuccessful or illegitimate. We organised focus group interviews with occupational groups that were heavily affected by pandemic restrictions—(1) health care, (2) teaching, (3) hospitality and (4) performing arts—and used stimulus material that consisted of six prominent cases of authority performances during the pandemic. Through frame analysis, we isolated six frames of contested authority during the pandemic: (1) regional alienation, (2) failed communication, (3) moral character, (4) incompetence, (5) ivory tower and (6) hostile media. The article demonstrates how these frames include elements of pragmatic, moral, and cognitive legitimacy.