Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Twitter Social Networks United States Politics

Just 6% of US Adults On Twitter Account For 73% of Political Tweets, Study Finds (techcrunch.com) 80

Posted by BeauHD from the small-but-loud dept.
A small number of prolific U.S. Twitter users create the majority of tweets, and that extends to Twitter discussions around politics, according to a new report from the Pew Research Center out today. Building on an earlier study, which discovered that 10% of users created 80% of tweets from U.S. adults, the organization today says that just 6% of U.S. adults on Twitter account for 73% of tweets about national politics. TechCrunch reports: Though your experience on Twitter may differ, based on who you follow, the majority of Twitter users don't mention politics in their tweets. In fact, Pew found that 69% never tweeted about politics or tweeted about the topic just once. Meanwhile, across all tweets from U.S. adults, only 13% of tweets were focused on national politics. The study was based on 1.1 million public tweets from June 2018 to June 2019, Pew says (2,427 users participated).

Only 22% of U.S. adults even have a Twitter account, and of those, only 31% are defined as "political tweeters" -- that is, they've posted at least five tweets and have posted at least twice about politics during the study period. Within this broader group of political tweeters, just 6% are defined as "prolific" -- meaning they've posted at least 10 tweets and at least 25% of their tweets mention national politics. This small subset then goes on to create 73% of all tweets from U.S. adults on the subject of national politics. What's concerning about the data is that it's those who are either far to the left or far to the right who are the ones dominating the political conversation on Twitter's platform. A majority of the prolific political tweeters (55%) say they identify as either "very liberal" or "every conservative." Among the non-political tweeting crowd, only 28% chose a more polarized label for themselves. The report goes on to say that the polarized subgroup heavily leans left. "For example, those who strongly approve of President Trump generated 25% of all tweets mentioning national politics. But those who strongly disapprove of Trump generated 72% of all tweets mentioning national politics. (They're also responsible for 80% of all tweets from U.S. adults on the platform.)"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Just 6% of US Adults On Twitter Account For 73% of Political Tweets, Study Finds More

Just 6% of US Adults On Twitter Account For 73% of Political Tweets, Study Finds

Comments Filter:

  • How do they define ... (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward

    ... adult?

    Covfefe!

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jrumney ( 197329 )

      How do they define US? I would be less surprised if they told me that Russian bots were responsible for 73% of political tweets, quite frankly.

  • A few people post batches of replies to any major figure's tweet, hiding any normal person's viewpoint. No surprise.

    • Mob persistence is what matters in that medium. And we should each weigh the opinions we find there accordingly. (Send to the circular file)

      The trouble I have with my family is the Internet is this great new thing, and they easily accept any garbage they see on it as fact. Television was a recognized misinformation engine, but we've gone from the age of steam to nuclear powered rockets in the span of 20 years when it comes to how we choose to consume information.

      I'm skeptical that society will find an equil

      • I remember back during the information age when everything on the Internet was gold.

        The voiceless (people you wouldn't want to listen to anyways) tainted everything and put a stop to that pretty quickly over the past decade.

        I don't think you can find any more public venues where you can get 100 honest opinions on any given topic. That was in the brochure for the Internet, but we're far from it.
        • The Web has splintered into hug boxes and echo chambers. Really sad to see that discourse has gone by the wayside.
          • Discourse on the internet has been in decline since September 1993.

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by rtb61 ( 674572 )

              Suck it up dude. The majority, well, they are not just that bright, not their fault, it's genetic their brains quite simply factually do not work as well as yours. The 100IQ denotes how quickly they can learn and how much they can learn, below 100IQ is a whole different world to above 100IQ, that's a little close, lets say, below 90IQ is an entirely different world to above 110IQ, those two groups actually do in reality see the world entirely differently, the 110IQ and over having an entirely different leve

        • I remember back during the information age when everything on the Internet was gold.

          I remember back when nobody took the nerds that used computers very seriously. Now that those nerds are billionaires people decided to take them seriously. Big mistake! Gut instinct was right in this case.

    • Modded troll for what reason? There's not even a counterpoint response. If you're going to mod it troll when it doesn't obviously seem to be that way, at least AC respond why you thought it was a troll.

  • Now do Slashdot! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Entrope ( 68843 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @06:38PM (#59340996) Homepage

    That kind of lopsided history is probably very typical for most social media, and even outside of the Internet. 10% of accounts are responsible for 80% of /. comments. 6% of addresses are responsible for 73% of filesystem-oriented emails to the Linux Kernel Mailing List. 8% of talking heads are responsible for 68% of the hot air on evening television. So on and so forth, across domains -- Vilfredo Pareto would not be surprised if he were writing on economics today.

  • Anti-Trump != Leftist (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Mononymous ( 6156676 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @06:39PM (#59340998)

    The report goes on to say that the polarized subgroup heavily leans left. "For example, those who strongly approve of President Trump generated 25% of all tweets mentioning national politics. But those who strongly disapprove of Trump generated 72% of all tweets mentioning national politics.

    I've never used Twitter, so I'm not actually in those numbers.
    However, I am decidedly right of center, but strongly disapprove of President Trump.

    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I can see how moderate democrat can feel "decidedly right of center" given the current state of mainstream media.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      You also have to wonder how Trump's base demographic compares to the national average when it come to being on Twitter. Maybe his supporters just aren't on that site.

  • How many are (Score:3, Insightful)

    by AHuxley ( 892839 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @06:44PM (#59341004) Journal
    politically active journalists virtue signalling for their own next SJW story link?
    With lots of ads and tracking?
    Push some SJW story, get the clicks, show the number of clicks as their 'ability' to sell ads and do productive publishing work?
    The clicks are from their own fellow journalists who have to virtue signalling that that saw the story..
    Get the next SJW story ready?

    It all worked until the brands find out their "political" friendly ads are not selling in the numbers expected as its not actual consumers doing the clicking :)
    Wonder what the rest of the internet is doing for actual fun? Its not clicking on SJW brand ads.

  • ... believe that shit.

  • ... is that anyone on Twitter takes it seriously.

  • There’s no point in posting on Twitter. It’s like yelling into the void.

    Though, on occasion, I criticize our moron-in-chief. I’m fairly certain no one ever actually reads it, but it makes me feel better. Because, you know, working for real political change takes actual time and effort, but bitching on Twitter I can do from my phone.

    • You can do that on here, too. And the one person who reads and replies (me) is likely more than real humans on Twitter once the bots are discounted.

    • I’m fairly certain no one ever actually reads it, but it makes me feel better.

      You might be surprised who ends up reading those posts one day. Things people wrote over a decade ago have come back to bite them in the ass.

      Why bother posting something that can be used against you in the future? It's probably better to just remain silent; the Internet never forgets.

  • Between the Twit and the Face, little else exists.
    One long political rant.
  • You can easily have said, "Just 6% of your relatives are responsible for 73% of political bombs thrown during Thanksgiving dinner."

    It's the same human behaviors, just with Le Twittre as the medium of choice.

  • Glad to see the other 94% have better things to do.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      In my experience only roughly 10% of adults actively follow politics beyond consuming generic news. Twitter's stats generally reflect this. The vast majority of people only casually care about politics.

  • The majority of these are not adults. They are sockpuppet and bot accounts. I am guessing the reason why Pew found what they did ("those who strongly disapprove of Trump generated 72% of all tweets mentioning national politics.") is because inveterate sleaze bomber David Brock [thenation.com] has been taking in reams of money to engage in such activity, since prior to 2016.

    Through my observations, there is a propaganda machine run through ShareBlue that disseminates the content. That is then amplified through a network o

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by radicimo ( 33693 )

      I just took a closer look at the Pew methodology, and given the way they did the study, perhaps I am wrong to claim their study did not primarily sample adults. Unclear how they accounted for and whether they properly factored out the sockpuppet accounts, but that's a different issue.

      All active members of the Ipsos panel with an active Twitter account were eligible for inclusion in this study. In all, 4,829 panelists responded to the survey. Of that group, 3,649 (76%) confirmed that they used Twitter. Amon

  • Twitter is little more than Donald Trump's platform for him to launch personal attacks, inciting harm against Americans. Abandon it.

  • 10% of users... (Score:4, Insightful)

    by cirby ( 2599 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @08:09PM (#59341236)

    10% of users account for 80% of Tweets in the first place, so that's not an extremely off-the-scale result, is it?

  • In every situation where people can be anonymous and heck most of the ones where people aren't anonymous there's always going to be a silent majority and a loud minority. I mean 95% of video game coverage is about how most people complaining are just part of a loud minority. Why would it be different in politics. voting numbers are appallingly low even when you correct for all the "legal" ways they stop people from voting, heck probably because they stop people from voting. why would it be any different in politics on twitter of all places.

  • PT Barnum is again affirmed. (Score:4)

    by msauve ( 701917 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @08:49PM (#59341298)
    "6% of US Adults On Twitter Account For 73% of Political Tweets, Study Finds"

    So fucking what?

    That's not a problem. The problem is the X% of US adults who get their political views from Twitter, rather than collecting multiple viewpoints, contrasting them with their own, and making an intelligent decision.

    Perhaps literacy tests aren't such a bad thing, despite the history.

    That applies to both "sides."
    • You act like you're not enjoying the gender-non-binary drag show and being inundated by 2nd class agendas on every other news posting. Live a little why don't cha?

    • It's like that online and offline.. A minority of the people is doing all the talking. Most people limit themselves by choosing between them because they don't feel eloquent enough to do their own talking. If you have dumb ideas you'll follow dumb twitter accounts. Others can be very sophisticated without saying a word. Twitter is talking. If a twitter account points you towards an interesting resource then what is the problem with that?

      A lot of effort goes into controlling these 'influencers', the talkativ

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      Isn't listening to a wide variety of news sources and views a good thing? Would you prefer they stick to the dreaded Mainstream Media?

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by ebvwfbw ( 864834 )

      Also sounds suspicious. 6% of the US population is around 20 million.

  • Twitter is bubble reinforcement (Score:4)

    by Applehu Akbar ( 2968043 ) on Wednesday October 23, 2019 @09:56PM (#59341384)

    I see the medium as enhancing the tendency of politicized activists on any topic to only talk with fellow sycophants. It converts normally frangible political bubbles into unpierceable carbon fiber. It's the bully's best weapon since the invention of the sneer.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AmiMoJo ( 196126 )

      That's no fun though. You have to follow people from the other side so you can argue with them. That's what Twitter is, it's that Monty Python Argument Clinic sketch brought to life.

  • They have teams. Organized. Intentional. If you've been convinced these are mostly one philosophical or the other, you're mostly wrong. Every movement has some.

    Of course, other channels and media are very helpful to them. Still, it's an organized system.

    My point is that no media is trustworthy. Not MSM, text, Twitter, FB, etc. None.

  • It's ludicrous that Twitter ever had any political influence to begin with. It's nothing but a glorified blog with weird post length limitations. .

    Twitter only ever had the significance that you gave it. I mean I understand that writing a "people said stuff on Twitter" story is a lot easier than writing an actual news story, but was it worth it?

  • Proving once again... (Score:3)

    by Atrox Canis ( 1266568 ) on Thursday October 24, 2019 @07:50AM (#59342086)

    That 72% of Trump Twitter Tweets are generated by Twits.

    Sorry, it was just sitting there begging to be picked up.

  • Eleanor Roosevelt talked about great minds talking about ideas, while average minds talk about events, and weak minds discuss people.

    6% of Twitter engages in great conversation, evidently.

  • Oh Wow, the have discovered the Power law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

  • Once again the Pareto exponential distribution, commonly referred to as the 20-80 rule, is a topic of concern in the statistics and math illiterate news media. The real world is comprised of many events that follow an exponential distribution where a few produce much. So what! Get used to it. Like the normal or binomial distribution, many real world events follow an exponential distribution. If we all had learned that many events are created by a few, we would stop being surprised when someone reveals it an

Slashdot Top Deals

The unfacts, did we have them, are too imprecisely few to warrant our certitude.

Close