In Congress, social media habits are becoming as polarized as politics, according to a new report

The report found Democrats couldn't stop talking about Trump in 2020. For Republicans, the word Biden barely registered.

American flag with crack through middle

A new Pew report paints a picture of how Republicans and Democrats shape both their losses and their victories online.

Image: No-Mad/Getty Images

In the runup to the 2020 election, the one word Democrats in Congress used on social media more than any other was "Trump." As for Republicans? The name Biden didn't even make the top 10.

These findings come from a new report by the Pew Research Center that analyzed how members of Congress from different political parties used social media during the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. Their findings suggest that lawmakers' social media habits are becoming as polarized as their politics.

Pew researchers analyzed the Facebook and Twitter posts of Congress members during the 2016 and 2020 election cycles to see not only how their use of the platform changed over time, but also how their social media strategies diverged by party. By sorting these posts according to their most frequently used words and other distinctive characteristics, the Pew researchers paint a clear picture of how the two parties have sought to shape both their losses and their victories online.

The researchers looked at the words that were used most distinctively by each party, which is to say, the words that were used more by one party than the other at different times. After Biden won the 2020 election, for instance, Republican mentions of the words "recount," "fraud" and "irregularity" rose, compared to the period before the election. When Trump won in 2016, on the other hand, the most distinctly used phrase from Democrats was "President-elect Trump."

Pew's analysis of the words used by each party also revealed differences in their messaging. For Democrats, Pew found the most distinctive terms were ones that dealt with issues of equality, voting, COVID-19 and health care, while Republicans used the words "bless," "Israel," "defund" and "liberal" disproportionately. And while "health" and "COVID" were among the top 10 words used most frequently by Democratic lawmakers in 2020, for Republicans, those same terms ranked 46th and 18th respectively.

The words politicians used tell only part of the story. The links they share tell the other. The most recent election saw an increase in what the researchers call "'link polarization," which the researchers define as the proportion of links that are "shared primarily or exclusively by members of one party." In 2016, just over half of the links shared by lawmakers went to domains used "predominantly or exclusively by members of one party," and in 2020 this figure grew to 67%.

Some of those domains include party-specific fundraising sites or even candidates' own websites, but others include partisan news outlets like Breitbart and Newsmax. The research clearly illustrated just how much the news diets of politicians in different parties diverge, with the median Democratic legislator linking to 50 different domains during the 2020 election, and the median Republican sharing from just 19.

Even as politicians grew more polarized in terms of the links they shared between the 2016 and 2020 elections, however, a smaller percentage of posts contained links in 2020, compared to 2016. It's not that lawmakers were posting less. In fact, legislators posted on social media platforms more and with greater engagement during the 2020 election cycle than in 2016. They were just relying less on third-party sources.

Although Pew researchers didn't attribute this shift to any one phenomenon, one possibility is that between 2016 and 2020, lawmakers felt more inclined to use their own voices, rather than rely on news outlets or outside experts. If these trends persist, that could drive both political parties even farther into their own echo chambers – both online and off.


Gavin Newsom shows crypto some California love

“A more flexible approach is needed,” Gov. Newsom said in rejecting a bill that would require crypto companies to get a state license.

Strong bipartisan support wasn’t enough to convince Newsom that requiring crypto companies to register with the state’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is the smart path for California.

Photo: Jerod Harris/Getty Images for Vox Media

The Digital Financial Assets Law seemed like a legislative slam dunk in California for critics of the crypto industry.

But strong bipartisan support — it passed 71-0 in the state assembly and 31-6 in the Senate — wasn’t enough to convince Gov. Gavin Newsom that requiring crypto companies to register with the state’s Department of Financial Protection and Innovation is the smart path for California.

Keep Reading Show less
Benjamin Pimentel

Benjamin Pimentel ( @benpimentel) covers crypto and fintech from San Francisco. He has reported on many of the biggest tech stories over the past 20 years for the San Francisco Chronicle, Dow Jones MarketWatch and Business Insider, from the dot-com crash, the rise of cloud computing, social networking and AI to the impact of the Great Recession and the COVID crisis on Silicon Valley and beyond. He can be reached at bpimentel@protocol.com or via Google Voice at (925) 307-9342.

Sponsored Content

Great products are built on strong patents

Experts say robust intellectual property protection is essential to ensure the long-term R&D required to innovate and maintain America's technology leadership.

Every great tech product that you rely on each day, from the smartphone in your pocket to your music streaming service and navigational system in the car, shares one important thing: part of its innovative design is protected by intellectual property (IP) laws.

From 5G to artificial intelligence, IP protection offers a powerful incentive for researchers to create ground-breaking products, and governmental leaders say its protection is an essential part of maintaining US technology leadership. To quote Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo: "intellectual property protection is vital for American innovation and entrepreneurship.”

Keep Reading Show less
James Daly
James Daly has a deep knowledge of creating brand voice identity, including understanding various audiences and targeting messaging accordingly. He enjoys commissioning, editing, writing, and business development, particularly in launching new ventures and building passionate audiences. Daly has led teams large and small to multiple awards and quantifiable success through a strategy built on teamwork, passion, fact-checking, intelligence, analytics, and audience growth while meeting budget goals and production deadlines in fast-paced environments. Daly is the Editorial Director of 2030 Media and a contributor at Wired.

Slack’s rallying cry at Dreamforce: No more meetings

It’s not all cartoon bears and therapy pigs — work conferences are a good place to talk about the future of work.

“We want people to be able to work in whatever way works for them with flexible schedules, in meetings and out of meetings,” Slack chief product officer Tamar Yehoshua told Protocol at Dreamforce 2022.

Photo: Marlena Sloss/Bloomberg via Getty Images

Dreamforce is primarily Salesforce’s show. But Slack wasn’t to be left out, especially as the primary connector between Salesforce and the mainstream working world.

The average knowledge worker spends more time using a communication tool like Slack than a CRM like Salesforce, positioning it as the best Salesforce product to concern itself with the future of work. In between meeting a therapy pig and meditating by the Dreamforce waterfall, Protocol sat down with several Slack execs and conference-goers to chat about the shifting future.

Keep Reading Show less
Lizzy Lawrence

Lizzy Lawrence ( @LizzyLaw_) is a reporter at Protocol, covering tools and productivity in the workplace. She's a recent graduate of the University of Michigan, where she studied sociology and international studies. She served as editor in chief of The Michigan Daily, her school's independent newspaper. She's based in D.C., and can be reached at llawrence@protocol.com.

LA is a growing tech hub. But not everyone may fit.

LA has a housing crisis similar to Silicon Valley’s. And single-family-zoning laws are mostly to blame.

As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers, whose high salaries put them at an advantage in both LA's renting and buying markets.

Photo: Nat Rubio-Licht/Protocol

LA’s tech scene is on the rise. The number of unicorn companies in Los Angeles is growing, and the city has become the third-largest startup ecosystem nationally behind the Bay Area and New York with more than 4,000 VC-backed startups in industries ranging from aerospace to creators. As the number of tech companies in the region grows, so does the number of tech workers. The city is quickly becoming more and more like Silicon Valley — a new startup and a dozen tech workers on every corner and companies like Google, Netflix, and Twitter setting up offices there.

But with growth comes growing pains. Los Angeles, especially the burgeoning Silicon Beach area — which includes Santa Monica, Venice, and Marina del Rey — shares something in common with its namesake Silicon Valley: a severe lack of housing.

Keep Reading Show less
Nat Rubio-Licht

Nat Rubio-Licht is a Los Angeles-based news writer at Protocol. They graduated from Syracuse University with a degree in newspaper and online journalism in May 2020. Prior to joining the team, they worked at the Los Angeles Business Journal as a technology and aerospace reporter.


SFPD can now surveil a private camera network funded by Ripple chair

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors approved a policy that the ACLU and EFF argue will further criminalize marginalized groups.

SFPD will be able to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks in certain circumstances.

Photo: Justin Sullivan/Getty Images

Ripple chairman and co-founder Chris Larsen has been funding a network of security cameras throughout San Francisco for a decade. Now, the city has given its police department the green light to monitor the feeds from those cameras — and any other private surveillance devices in the city — in real time, whether or not a crime has been committed.

This week, San Francisco’s Board of Supervisors approved a controversial plan to allow SFPD to temporarily tap into private surveillance networks during life-threatening emergencies, large events, and in the course of criminal investigations, including investigations of misdemeanors. The decision came despite fervent opposition from groups, including the ACLU of Northern California and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, which say the police department’s new authority will be misused against protesters and marginalized groups in a city that has been a bastion for both.

Keep Reading Show less
Issie Lapowsky

Issie Lapowsky ( @issielapowsky) is Protocol's chief correspondent, covering the intersection of technology, politics, and national affairs. She also oversees Protocol's fellowship program. Previously, she was a senior writer at Wired, where she covered the 2016 election and the Facebook beat in its aftermath. Prior to that, Issie worked as a staff writer for Inc. magazine, writing about small business and entrepreneurship. She has also worked as an on-air contributor for CBS News and taught a graduate-level course at New York University's Center for Publishing on how tech giants have affected publishing.

Latest Stories