One of the hallmarks of the Trump Administration has been the president’s frequent use of Twitter to express his approval of or disdain for firms such as L.L. Bean or Macy’s. The suddenness with which corporations have come into the political spotlight presents a research opportunity to scholars interested in opinion leadership and partisan polarization. To what extent do presidential tweets lead to polarization of Democrats’ and Republicans’ opinions about the firms that are praised or excoriated? Are these effects especially strong among co-partisans? How long-lasting are they? Using weekly evaluations of firms that came under fire from President Trump’s tweets, we model the net brand ratings of Democratic and Republican respondents. Our time-series results suggest that presidential criticism via Twitter typically has strong immediate effects on net ratings that subside after a few months. One noteworthy exception is presidential criticism of Apple, which coincided with criticism from prominent Democrats as well. Overall, the magnitude of the immediate effect demonstrates the role of elite opinion leadership in precipitating polarized assessments of firms that were previously evaluated similarly across the political spectrum.
BandaKevin K.CarseyThomas M.SeverenchukSerge. 2020. “Evidence of Conflict Extension in Partisans’ Evaluations of People and Inanimate Objects.” American Politics Research48 (2): 275–85.
2.
BeckerAmy B.CopelandLauren. 2016. “Networked Publics: How Connective Social Media Use Facilitates Political Consumerism among LGBT Americans.” Journal of Information Technology & Politics13 (1): 22–36.
3.
BennettW. LanceEntmanRobert M., eds. 2000. Mediated Politics: Communication in the Future of Democracy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
4.
CampbellAngusConversePhilip E.MillerWarren E.StokesDonald E.1960. The American Voter. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
5.
Canes-WroneBrandice. 2006. Who Leads Whom?: Presidents, Policy, and the Public. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
6.
CavariAmnon. 2013. “The Short-Term Effect of Going Public.” Political Research Quarterly66 (2): 336–51.
7.
CohenJeffrey E.2015. “Presidential Leadership of Public Opinion: An Embedded Survey Experiment.”Political Communication32 (3): 345–355.
8.
CopelandLaurenBeckerAmy B.2019. “Voting at the Ballot Box and in the Marketplace during the 2016 US Presidential Election.” International Journal of Public Opinion Research31 (4): 767–78.
9.
De ZúñigaHomero GilCopelandLaurenBimberBruce. 2014. “Political Consumerism: Civic Engagement and the Social Media Connection.” New Media & Society16 (3): 488–506.
10.
EdwardsGeorge C.2003. On Deaf Ears: The Limits of the Bully Pulpit. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
11.
EndresKylePanagopoulosCostas. 2017. “Boycotts, Buycotts, and Political Consumerism in America.” Research & Politics4 (4): 1–9.
12.
EvansHeather K.CordovaVictoriaSipoleSavannah. 2014. “Twitter Style: An Analysis of How House Candidates Used Twitter in Their 2012 Campaigns.” PS: Political Science & Politics47 (2): 454–62.
13.
GerberAlanGreenDonald P.1998. “Rational Learning and Partisan Attitudes.” American Journal of Political Science42:794–818.
14.
GiftKarenGiftThomas. 2015. “Does Politics Influence Hiring? Evidence from a Randomized Experiment.” Political Behavior37 (3): 653–75.
HainmuellerJensHiscoxMichael J.2015b. “The Socially Conscious Consumer? Field Experimental Tests of Consumer Support for Fair Labor Standards.” Research paper no. 2012-15, MIT Political Science Department.
18.
HainmuellerJensHiscoxMichael J.SequeiraSandra. 2015. “Consumer Demand for Fair Trade: Evidence from a Multistore Field Ex- periment.”Review of Economics and Statistics97 (2): 242–56.
19.
HuddyLeonieMasonLillianaAarøeLene. 2015. “Expressive Partisanship: Campaign Involvement, Political Emotion, and Partisan Identity.” American Political Science Review109 (1): 1–17.
20.
IyengarShantoSoodGauravLelkesYphtach. 2012. “Affect, Not Ideology: A Social Identity Perspective on Polarization.” Public Opinion Quarterly76 (3): 405–31.
21.
IyengarShantoWestwoodSean J.2015. “Fear and Loathing across Party Lines: New Evidence on Group Polarization.” American Journal of Political Science59 (3): 690–707.
LelkesYphtach. 2016. “Mass Polarization: Manifestations and Measurements.” Public Opinion Quarterly80 (S1): 392–410.
24.
LenzGabriel S.2013. Follow the Leader?: How Voters Respond to Politicians’ Policies and Performance. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
25.
LiuXiaBurnsAlvin C.HouYingjian. 2017. “An Investigation of Brand-Related User-Generated Content on Twitter.” Journal of Advertising46 (2): 236–47.
26.
LodgeMiltonTaberCharles S.2005. “The Automaticity of Affect for Political Leaders, Groups, and Issues: An Experimental Test of the Hot Cognition Hypothesis.” Political Psychology26 (3): 455–82.
27.
MasonLilliana. 2018. Uncivil Agreement: How Politics Became Our Identity. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
28.
McConnellChristopherMargalitYotamMalhotraNeilLevenduskyMatthew. 2018. “The Economic Consequences of Partisanship in a Polarized Era.” American Journal of Political Science62 (1): 5–18.
MillerPatrick R.ConoverPamela Johnston. 2015. “Red and Blue States of Mind: Partisan Hostility and Voting in the United States.” Political Research Quarterly68 (2): 225–39.
NeilsonLisa A.2010. “Boycott or Buycott? Understanding Political Consumerism.” Journal of Consumer Behaviour9 (3): 214–27.
33.
NewmanBenjamin J.BartelsBrandon L.2011. “Politics at the Checkout Line: Explaining Political Consumerism in the United States.” Political Research Quarterly64 (4): 803–17.
34.
PanagopoulosCostasGreenDonald P.KrasnoJonathan S.Schwam-BairdMichaelEndresKyle. 2020. “Partisan Consumerism: Experimental Tests of Consumer Reactions to Corporate Political Activity.” Journal of Politics82 (3): 996–1007.
35.
RussellAnnelise. 2018. “US Senators on Twitter: Asymmetric Party Rhetoric in 140 Characters.” American Politics Research46 (4): 695–723.
36.
ShahDhavan V.McLeodDouglas M.KimEunkyungLeeSun YoungGotliebMelissa R.HoShirley S.BreivikHilde. 2007. “Political Consumerism: How Communication and Consumption Orientations Drive ‘Lifestyle Politics’.” The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science611 (1): 217–35.
37.
StoleeGalenCatonSteve. 2018. “Twitter, Trump, and the Base: A Shift to a New Form of Presidential Talk?” Signs and Society6 (1): 147–65.
38.
StolleDietlindMichelettiMichele. 2015. Political Consumerism: Global Responsibility in Action. New York: Cambridge University Press.
39.
TajfelHenriTurnerJohn. 1979. “An Integrative Theory of Intergroup Conflict.” In The Social Psychology of Intergroup Relations, edited by AustinWilliam G.WorchelStephen, 33–47. Monterey, CA: Brooks/Cole.
40.
TedinKentRottinghausBrandonRodgersHarrell. 2011. “When the President Goes Public: The Consequences of Communication Mode for Opinion Change across Issue Types and Groups.” Political Research Quarterly64 (3): 506–19.
41.
WellsChrisShahDhavan V.PevehouseJon C.YangJungHwanPelledAyelletBoehmFrederickLukitoJosephineGhoshShreenitaSchmidtJessica L.2016. “How Trump Drove Coverage to the Nomination: Hybrid Media Campaigning.” Political Communication33 (4): 669–76.
42.
WlezienChristopher. 2015. “The Myopic Voter? The Economy and US Presidential Elections.” Electoral Studies39:195–204.
43.
ZallerJohn R.1992. The Nature and Origins of Mass Opinion. New York: Cambridge University Press.
44.
ZhangYiniWellsChrisWangSongRoheKarl. 2018. “Attention and Amplification in the Hybrid Media System: The Composition and Activity of Donald Trump’s Twitter Following during the 2016 Presidential Election.” New Media & Society20 (9): 3161–82.
