Science communication at its worst.
Here is an example from The Age today: https://www.theage.com.au/national/scientists-call-for-pause-on-astrazeneca-vaccine-rollout-20210112-p56tjt.html

Sorry folks - this will be a thread. #CovidVaccine
Read this article and watch as The Age portrays the "disagreement" going on between scientists. #scicomm

Who: The Australian and New Zealand Society for Immunology
Call: federal government should immediately pause the planned rollout of the AstraZeneca vaccine"
"Professor Stephen Turner said based on current trial evidence the AstraZeneca vaccine should not be widely rolled out."

Hang on, Professor Turner said something positive "But it could be used as a tool to blunt the effect of COVID until those vaccines could be deployed.”

Time to find another "expert" to throw some gas on the fire here.

"the Australasian Virology Society confirmed to The Age and The Sydney Morning Herald that it supported an immediate pause in plans to roll out the AstraZeneca vaccine until research proved it was effective enough to achieve herd immunity."

Yep - there is another society.

"But following a furious internal debate, the president of the virology society contacted The Age and the Herald late on Tuesday evening to say it had changed its position and no longer opposed the rollout of the vaccine."

And here is where it gets good folks:

Professor Gilda Tachedjian: “One reason is we don’t want to undermine the confidence in the vaccine. And we don’t have the full picture. We need to go with the most effective vaccine so we can have herd immunity. "

Then a Dark Knight appears:

Associate Professor James Wood, member of the federal government’s Australian Technical Advisory Group on Immunisation, said herd immunity was “the long game”, and providing a vaccine that could protect life immediately was much more important

Lets not get too positive:
It remains unproven if any of the vaccines can prevent transmission of coronavirus.
Professor Drummer said clinical data suggested the Pfizer and Moderna vaccines were far more likely to do so than AstraZeneca's, but more studies needed to be conducted.

Lets stoke the fire more:
Dr Andrew Miller, president of the Australian Medical Association’s Western Australia branch: “We've got plenty of money, and we have got plenty of time because we have very good disease control. Why would we settle for the second-best option?”

But wait: Burnet Institute director Professor Brendan Crabb “Personally, I'd much rather have AstraZeneca than nothing. I would have it tomorrow. It is a highly safe and effective vaccine,” he said.

I could keep going with this article but suffice it so say it is a perfect example of how to confuse the public, show complete confusion between scientists, and remove any chance of public confidents.
I'll be using this article for years to teach researchers about media.

And now the political power grabbing continues with help from this irresponsible headline.