Cannabis-Related Political Discourse on Twitter: A Mixed Methods Approach

Abstract

Twitter is a widely used platform for following current events and prominent celebrities, influencers, and political leaders. Politicians use Twitter to share their viewpoints and disseminate information about legislative changes, prompting inquiries into their role in influencing public opinion on social media. This study examines a set of cannabis-related tweets (n = 10,410) authored by current U.S. Governors and members of Congress (as of March 2022) to understand the nature of political discourse on social media. The dataset is analyzed with descriptive and inferential statistics, while a subsample (n = 1714) is subject to a qualitative thematic analysis. Most tweets are informative and neutral in tone, although some politicians use non-neutral language to convey their message. Cannabis tweets can be categorized into six themes: economy, government/governing process, public health, justice, substance use/abuse, and other. The results have implications for future research and our understanding of political discourse on social media.

Keywords

cannabis policy political discourse United States twitter mixed methods state officials

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Anslinger

H. J.

(1937). Marijuana: Assassin of youth. American Magazine.

Babin

(2022). Marijuana normalization and media framing [Ph.D. thesis. The University of Iowa. https://www.proquest.com/docview/2695276521/abstract/E95BEDA02A814CB7PQ/1

Bae

S. Y.

(2016). A new sphere for political discourse: Understanding Twitter as a sphere for political discussion. International Journal of Journalism & Mass Communication, 3(1), 121–126. https://doi.org/10.15344/2349-2635/2016/121

Barberá

(2020). Social media, echo chambers, and political polarization. In Persily

Tucker

J. A.

(Eds.), Social media and democracy: The state of the field, prospects for reform. Cambridge University Press.

Bestvater

Shah

Rivero

Smith

(2022, June 16). Politics on twitter: One-third of tweets from U.S. Adults are political. Pew Research Center - U.S. Politics & Policy. https://www.pewresearch.org/politics/2022/06/16/politics-on-twitter-one-third-of-tweets-from-u-s-adults-are-political/

Blumenfeld

B. M.

(2017). State legalization of marijuana and our American system of federalism: A historio-constitutional primer. Virginia Journal of Social Policy & the Law, 24(2), 77–96.

Bode

Dalrymple

K. E.

(2016). Politics in 140 characters or less: Campaign communication, network interaction, and political participation on Twitter. Journal of Political Marketing, 15(4), 311–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/15377857.2014.959686

Braun

Clarke

(2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Breeze

(2021). Claiming credibility in online comments: Popular debate surrounding the COVID-19 vaccine. Publications, 9(3), 34. https://doi.org/10.3390/publications9030034

10.

Burstein

(2003). The impact of public opinion on public policy: A review and an agenda. Political Research Quarterly, 56(1), 29–40. https://doi.org/10.2307/3219881

11.

Clarke

R. C.

Merlin

(2016). Cannabis: Evolution and ethnobotany. University of California Press.

12.

Colliander

Marder

Lid Falkman

Madestam

Modig

Sagfossen

(2017). The social media balancing act: Testing the use of a balanced self-presentation strategy for politicians using Twitter. Computers in Human Behavior, 74, 277–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2017.04.042

13.

Conover

Ratkiewicz

Francisco

Gonçalves

Menczer

Flammini

(2011). Political polarization on twitter. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 5(1), 89–96. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v5i1.14126, https://ojs.aaai.org/index.php/ICWSM/article/view/14126

14.

Corva

Meisel

J. S.

(2022). The routledge handbook of post-prohibition cannabis research. Routledge.

15.

Cox

Edwards

(2022, August 30). Black Americans have a clear vision for reducing racism but little hope it will happen. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/race-ethnicity/wp-content/uploads/sites/18/2022/08/RE_2022.08.30_Black-Voices-Politics_REPORT.pdf

16.

Creswell

J. W.

(2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Sage.

17.

Dixon

(2022, July 27). Countries with most Twitter users 2022. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/242606/number-of-active-twitter-users-in-selected-countries/

18.

Gregory

(2017). The echo chamber effect in Twitter: Does community polarization increase? In Cherifi

Gaito

Quattrociocchi

Sala

(Eds.), Complex networks & their applications (Vol. 693, pp. 373–378). Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-50901-3_30

19.

Duncombe

(2019). The politics of Twitter: Emotions and the power of social media. International Political Sociology, 13(4), 409–429. https://doi.org/10.1093/ips/olz013

20.

Dunmire

P. L.

(2005). Preempting the future: Rhetoric and ideology of the future in political discourse. Discourse & Society, 16(4), 481–513. https://doi.org/10.1177/0957926505053052

21.

Earleywine

(2002). Understanding marijuana: A new look at the scientific evidence. Oxford University Press.

22.

Edrington

C. L.

Lee

(2018). Tweeting a social movement: Black Lives Matter and its use of Twitter to share information, build community, and promote action. The Journal of Public Interest Communications, 2(2), 289. https://doi.org/10.32473/jpic.v2.i2.p289

23.

ElSohly

M. A.

Slade

(2005). Chemical constituents of marijuana: The complex mixture of natural cannabinoids. Life Sciences, 78(5), 539–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lfs.2005.09.011

24.

Frimer

J. A.

Aujla

Feinberg

Skitka

L. J.

Aquino

Eichstaedt

J. C.

Willer

(2022). Incivility is rising among American politicians on Twitter. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 14(2), 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1177/19485506221083811

25.

Frimer

J. A.

Brandt

M. J.

Melton

Motyl

(2019). Extremists on the left and right use angry, negative language. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 45(8), 1216–1231. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146167218809705

26.

Galle

Leahy

(2008). Laboratories of democracy—policy innovation in decentralized governments. Emory Law Journal, 58(6), 1333–1400.

27.

Galliher

J. F.

Walker

(1977). The puzzle of the social origins of the Marihuana tax act of 1937. Social Problems, 24(3), 367–376. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1977.24.3.03a00080

28.

Grant

W. J.

Moon

Busby Grant

(2010). Digital dialogue? Australian politicians’ use of the social network tool Twitter. Australian Journal of Political Science, 45(4), 579–604. https://doi.org/10.1080/10361146.2010.517176

29.

Grinspoon

Bakalar

J. B.

(1995). Marihuana as medicine: A plea for reconsideration. JAMA, 273(23), 1875–1876. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.1995.03520470083037

30.

Hannah

A. L.

Mallinson

D. J.

(2018). Defiant innovation: The adoption of medical marijuana laws in the American States. Policy Studies Journal, 46(2), 402–423. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12211

31.

Harry

(1937). Anslinger’s Testimony on the Marihuana tax act of 1937: Hearing before the ways and means committee. U.S. Congress the Marihuana tax act of 1937. https://www.druglibrary.org/schaffer/hemp/taxact/anslng1.htm

32.

Hawdon

J. E.

(2001). The role of presidential rhetoric in the creation of a moral panic: Reagan, bush, and the war on drugs. Deviant Behavior, 22(5), 419–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/01639620152472813

33.

Hemphill

Otterbacher

Shapiro

(2013). What’s congress doing on Twitter? In Bruckman

Counts

Lampe

Terveen

(Eds.), Proceedings of the 2013 Conference on Computer Supported Cooperative Work (pp. 877–886). Association for Computing Machinery: New York, NY.

34.

Hong

Kim

S. H.

(2016). Political polarization on Twitter: Implications for the use of social media in digital governments. Government Information Quarterly, 33(4), 777–782. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2016.04.007

35.

Huszár

Ktena

S. I.

O’Brien

Belli

Schlaikjer

Hardt

(2022). Algorithmic amplification of politics on Twitter. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 119(1), Article e2025334119. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2025334119

36.

Hutto

Gilbert

(2014). VADER: A parsimonious rule-based model for sentiment analysis of social media text. Proceedings of the International AAAI Conference on Web and Social Media, 8(1), 216–225. https://doi.org/10.1609/icwsm.v8i1.14550

37.

Johnson

Goldwasser

(2016). Identifying stance by analyzing political discourse on Twitter. In Bamman

Dogruoz

A.S.

Eisenstein

Hovy

Jurgens

O-Connor

Tsur

Volkova

(Eds.), Proceedings of the First Workshop on NLP and Computational Social Science (pp. 66–75). Association for Computational Linguistics: Austin, TX. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W16-5609

38.

Kary

(2022, January 18). Cannabis banking is booming despite federal uncertainty. Bloomberg.Com. https://www.bloomberg.com/news/newsletters/2022-01-18/marijuana-banking-is-moving-forward-despite-federal-uncertainty

39.

Kentucky Department of Agriculture . (2021, April 29). Kentucky Department of Agriculture licenses 2021 hemp growers, processors. https://www.kyagr.com/ky-agnews/press-releases/2021/Kentucky-Department-of-Agriculture-licenses-2021-hemp-growers-processors.html

40.

Lévesque

(2022). Making sense of pot: Conceptual tools for analyzing legal cannabis policy discourse. Critical Policy Studies, 17(1), 4–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/19460171.2022.2044874

41.

Maier

Nai

(2020). Roaring candidates in the spotlight: Campaign negativity, emotions, and media coverage in 107 national elections. The International Journal of Press/Politics, 25(4), 576–606. https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220919093

42.

Mann

Ginder

Byun

S.-E.

(2022). Highs and lows of cannabis decriminalization: Twitter analysis and ethical and regulatory implications for retailing and marketing. Journal of Global Marketing, 35(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.1080/08911762.2021.1958971

43.

Marcos

(2022, April 1). Just three GOP lawmakers back marijuana legalization vote; two Dems vote ‘no.’ the Hill. https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3256567-just-three-gop-lawmakers-back-marijuana-legalization-vote-two-dems-vote-no/

44.

McCarthy

(2022, May 27). Americans remain steadfast on policing reform needs in 2022. Gallup News Social & Policy Issues. https://news.gallup.com/poll/393119/americans-remain-steadfast-policing-reform-needs-2022.aspx

45.

McGregor

S. C.

(2020). “Taking the temperature of the room”: How political campaigns use social media to understand and represent public opinion. Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(S1), 236–256. https://doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa012

46.

Miller

H. T.

(2020). Narrative politics in public policy: Legalizing cannabis. Springer.

47.

Mitchell

(2019, April 24). Sizing up Twitter users. Internet, science & tech. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2019/04/24/sizing-up-twitter-users/

48.

Murthy

(2012). Towards a sociological understanding of social media: Theorizing Twitter. Sociology, 46(6), 1059–1073. https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038511422553

49.

Murthy

(2017). The ontology of Tweets: Mixed-method approaches to the study of Twitter. In Sloan

Quan-Haase

(Eds.), The sage handbook of social media research (pp. 559–572). Sage.

50.

Murthy

Gross

A. J.

(2017). Social media processes in disasters: Implications of emergent technology use. Social Science Research, 63, 356–370. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ssresearch.2016.09.015

51.

Najafizada

Rahman

Donnan

Dong

Bishop

(2022). Analyzing sentiments and themes on cannabis in Canada using 2018 to 2020 Twitter data. Journal of Cannabis Research, 4(1), 22. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42238-022-00132-1

52.

Nixon

(1970, October 27). Address to the nation on the comprehensive drug abuse prevention and control act of 1970. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-signing-the-comprehensive-drug-abuse-prevention-and-control-act-1970

53.

Nixon

(1971, June 17). Address to the nation on drug abuse. https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/documents/remarks-about-intensified-program-for-drug-abuse-prevention-and-control

54.

Nonnecke

Perez de Acha

Choi

Crittenden

Gutiérrez Cortés

F. I.

Martin Del Campo

Miranda-Villanueva

O. M.

(2022). Harass, mislead, & polarize: An analysis of Twitter political bots’ tactics in targeting the immigration debate before the 2018 U.S. midterm election. Journal of Information Technology & Politics, 19(4), 423–434. https://doi.org/10.1080/19331681.2021.2004287

55.

NORC . (2020, June). Widespread desire for policing and criminal justice reform. NORC at the University of Chicago. https://apnorc.org/projects/widespread-desire-for-policing-and-criminal-justice-reform/

56.

Nowell

L. S.

Norris

J. M.

White

D. E.

Moules

N. J.

(2017). Thematic analysis: Striving to meet the trustworthiness criteria. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 16(1), 160940691773384. https://doi.org/10.1177/1609406917733847

57.

Nseir

(2022, February 17). Value of hemp production totaled $824 million in 2021. https://www.nass.usda.gov/Newsroom/2022/02-17-2022.php

58.

Odabaş

(2022, May 5). 10 facts about Americans and Twitter. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2022/05/05/10-facts-about-americans-and-twitter/

59.

Owusu-Bempah

Rehmatullah

(2023). Waiting to inhale: Cannabis legalization and the fight for racial justice. MIT Press.

60.

Pourebrahim

Sultana

Edwards

Gochanour

Mohanty

(2019). Understanding communication dynamics on twitter during natural disasters: A case study of Hurricane Sandy. International Journal of Disaster Risk Reduction, 37, 101176. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijdrr.2019.101176

61.

Radwan

M. M.

Chandra

Gul

ElSohly

M. A.

(2021). Cannabinoids, phenolics, terpenes and alkaloids of cannabis. Molecules, 26(9), 2774. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26092774

62.

Schaeffer

(2021). 6 facts about Americans and marijuana. Pew Research Center. https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/04/26/facts-about-marijuana/

63.

Shafer Commission . (1972). Marihuana: A signal of misunderstanding. National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse. https://archive.org/details/marihuanasignalo00unit

64.

Shapiro

M. A.

Hemphill

(2017). Politicians and the policy agenda: Does use of Twitter by the US Congress direct New York Times content? Policy & Internet, 9(1), 109–132. https://doi.org/10.1002/poi3.120

65.

Tay

W. C.

Bewley

Maul

J.-T.

Oon

H. H.

(2023). Attitudes towards COVID vaccine and vaccine hesitancy in dermatology: A narrative review. Vaccines, 11(8), 1365. https://doi.org/10.3390/vaccines11081365

66.

Twitter . (nd). New user FAQ - tweeting. https://help.twitter.com/en/resources/new-user-faq

67.

Twitter News . (2022, September 12). How many people come to Twitter for news? As it turns out, a LOT. https://blog.twitter.com/en_us/topics/insights/2022/how-many-people-come-twitter-for-news

68.

Uyheng

Bellutta

Carley

K. M.

(2022). Bots amplify and redirect hate speech in online discourse about racism during the COVID-19 pandemic. Social Media + Society, 8(3), 205630512211047. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051221104749

69.

Vitiello

(1997). Proposition 215: De facto legalization of pot and the shortcomings of direct democracy. University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform, 31(3), 707–776.

70.

Vosoughi

Roy

Aral

(2018). The spread of true and false news online. Science, 359(6380), 1146–1151. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.aap9559

71.

Wlezien

(2017). Public opinion and policy representation: On conceptualization, measurement, and interpretation. Policy Studies Journal, 45(4), 561–582. https://doi.org/10.1111/psj.12190

72.

Yaqub

Chun

S. A.

Atluri

Vaidya

(2017). Analysis of political discourse on Twitter in the context of the 2016 US presidential elections. Government Information Quarterly, 34(4), 613–626. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2017.11.001

73.

Zelenkauskaite

(2022). Creating chaos online: Disinformation and subverted post-publics. University of Michigan Press. https://doi.org/10.3998/mpub.12237294