Twitter Analysis Reveals Deep Political Divide over Ferguson Shooting

image
Jane SusskindJane Susskind
Published: 25 Nov, 2014
2 min read

Twitter has hosted opinions about Ferguson since the incident first gained national attention, with organizers using the platform to plan protests and users adding their two-cents in 140 characters or less. 

However, recent analysis reveals that while there is constant chatter surrounding the shooting, riots, and subsequent grand jury hearing, users remain deeply divided on the issue. What’s more, users seem to be entirely unreceptive to opposing views on the issue. 

As you can see in the graphic below, the “red" and “blue” users are talking past each other. The self-identified conservative tweeters and the self-identified liberal tweeters ignore each other on the social network:

People mostly tweeted right past each other when talking about Ferguson. (Emma Piers)

People mostly tweeted right past each other when talking about Ferguson.(Emma Piers

In the image, as explained by statistician Emma Pierson, who published her analysis on Quartz, "each point is one of the most talkative tweeters, and two points are connected if one mentions the other: in essence, the image depicts the social network of who talks to whom. It shows two clearly divided groups."

Pierson continues:

"So maybe if everyone would just talk to each other they would get along? Not necessarily: when the red and blue group did talk, it often wasn’t pretty." 

Twitter, if used productively, has the capacity to connect people from all corners of the globe with ideas and analysis they might otherwise be blind to. If used unproductively, it becomes an echo chamber, further highlighting our inability to engage with users who may not share our views. 

This problem is not unique to Ferguson. It is not unique to Twitter. It is the very root of what is wrong with American politics today and sheds light on the underlying divisions that partisanship breeds.  

IVP Donate

People with opposing views don’t know how to have a civil, respectful discussion about politics. That’s why most Americans just avoid getting involved in the political process altogether.  

With a mainstream media that favors sensationalism over rationality, who can blame them for sitting out of the debate? By viewing controversies through a “red” v. “blue” lens, the news available to Americans presupposes that there are only two sides to every story -- only two solutions to every challenge facing the nation. This is just wrong

You Might Also Like

court gavel.
Virtual Discussion: The Fight for Equal Independent Voting Rights Makes it to SCOTUS
Every major voting rights movement in U.S. history – whether successful or not – has intertwined with landmark litigation. This was the case for women’s suffrage. It was the case for civil rights. And it is the case in the ongoing effort to protect the right of all voters to have equal participation in taxpayer-funded elections – something millions of independent voters are denied across the U.S....
29 Sep, 2025
-
2 min read
Supreme Court building
SCOTUS Considers Challenge to Closed Primaries -- Here's Why It Is Such a Big Deal
In a dramatic step forward for litigation challenging closed primaries, the U.S. Supreme Court has indicated they are going to conference to discuss whether to grant a writ of certiorari to Polelle v. Florida Secretary of State; a case challenging Florida's closed primaries that Open Primaries has supported since its inception....
26 Sep, 2025
-
2 min read
SQ836 supporters
Oklahoma GOP Fails To Block Open Primaries Initiative from Going Before Voters
The Oklahoma Supreme Court on Tuesday unanimously rejected a challenge to a proposed ballot initiative that would open taxpayer-funded primary elections to all candidates and voters, regardless of party affiliation – paving the way for the signature petition process to begin....
17 Sep, 2025
-
4 min read