Immigration discourse in a polarized era: Insights from social media before and after the 2020 US presidential election

Abstract

This study assesses changes in public attitudes toward immigration by using over 9 million tweets collected during the six months before and after the 2020 presidential election. It employs political and demographic variables, including political affiliation, income, and the proportion of foreign residents, to explore pro- and anti-immigration sentiment. The analysis reveals a decline in immigration-related tweets post-election, with a significant reduction in politically polarized topics. Republicans showed higher activity on immigration issues before the election, but both party supporters engaged similarly afterward. Throughout the study period, pro-immigration tweets outnumbered the anti-immigration ones, and the state-level factors most associated with pro-immigration attitudes were higher median incomes and the higher share of foreign populations. The study employs intergroup contact theory and group threat theory to explain shifts in public discourse, finding support for both perspectives. Qualitative analysis showed pro-immigration sentiment was primarily rooted in humanitarian and ethical concerns, while anti-immigration views centered around the immigration status and perceived economic, political, and security threats. At the same time, division was observed in the anti-immigration sentiment towards immigrants having legal and illegal status in the U.S. This research contributes to understanding how political events and demographic variables shape online immigration discourse. The study concludes that political events, such as elections, significantly influence the tone and frequency of immigration discourse on social media, contributing to both polarization and shifts in public sentiment.