Stakeholders / Tweeters
The 616 tweets analysed came from 351 verified Twitter accounts. The majority of these users (75%) accounted for just one tweet in the sample, while a small group of 21 accounts (6%) had multiple tweets included in the sample (from 5-28 tweets per user). Overall, the accounts had an average 3,972,526 user following, and themselves followed an average of 4394 users. The users were thus 'influencers' with more followers than people they followed. Tweets also had an overall retweet average of 5468 and were on average favourited 16837 times. As Table 2 shows, the primary stakeholder group was 'individuals' (51%), meaning influencers such as pop stars, activists, politicians, and journalists. Official media companies accounted for 31% of the tweets, followed by health or government organisations (15%), others (5%), and the private sector (1%).
Figure 2 depicts the demographics, as the tweets came from 35 different countries. The majority of these from the USA (n=267, ~43%) and India (n=108, ~17.5%). Following were the UK (n=108, ~10%), Switzerland (n=32, ~5%), Philippines (n=27, ~4%), and China (n=21, ~3%). 11 tweets had unknown locations.
The 616 tweets analysed came from 351 verified Twitter accounts. The majority of these users (75%) accounted for just one tweet in the sample, while a small group of 21 accounts (6%) had multiple tweets included in the sample (from 5-28 tweets per user). Overall, the accounts had an average 3,972,526 user following, and themselves followed an average of 4394 users. The users were thus 'influencers' with more followers than people they followed. Tweets also had an overall retweet average of 5468 and were on average favourited 16837 times. As Table 2 shows, the primary stakeholder group was 'individuals' (51%), meaning influencers such as pop stars, activists, politicians, and journalists. Official media companies accounted for 31% of the tweets, followed by health or government organisations (15%), others (5%), and the private sector (1%).
Figure 2 depicts the demographics, as the tweets came from 35 different countries. The majority of these from the USA (n=267, ~43%) and India (n=108, ~17.5%). Following were the UK (n=108, ~10%), Switzerland (n=32, ~5%), Philippines (n=27, ~4%), and China (n=21, ~3%). 11 tweets had unknown locations.
The 616 tweets analysed came from 351 verified Twitter accounts. The majority of these users (75%) accounted for just one tweet in the sample, while a small group of 21 accounts (6%) had multiple tweets included in the sample (from 5-28 tweets per user). Overall, the accounts had an average 3,972,526 user following, and themselves followed an average of 4394 users. The users were thus 'influencers' with more followers than people they followed. Tweets also had an overall retweet average of 5468 and were on average favourited 16837 times. As Table 2 shows, the primary stakeholder group was 'individuals' (51%), meaning influencers such as pop stars, activists, politicians, and journalists. Official media companies accounted for 31% of the tweets, followed by health or government organisations (15%), others (5%), and the private sector (1%).
Figure 2 depicts the demographics, as the tweets came from 35 different countries. The majority of these from the USA (n=267, ~43%) and India (n=108, ~17.5%). Following were the UK (n=108, ~10%), Switzerland (n=32, ~5%), Philippines (n=27, ~4%), and China (n=21, ~3%). 11 tweets had unknown locations.
Table 2. Stakeholder statistics
Stakeholder
|
Total Followers
|
Total Following
|
Total Retweets
|
Total Favourites
|
Total Tweets
|
% of Sample
|
Health or Gov
|
347222414
|
95452
|
287390
|
468975
|
93
|
15.1%
|
Individuals
|
413203578
|
2316248
|
2165539
|
7371062
|
315
|
51.1%
|
Media
|
1601570945
|
263561
|
707959
|
1806942
|
188
|
30.5%
|
Other
|
30497591
|
21745
|
70441
|
198460
|
14
|
2.3%
|
Private Sector
|
54581286
|
674
|
137184
|
525973
|
6
|
1%
|
Total
|
2447075814
|
2697680
|
3368513
|
10371412
|
616
|
100%
|
Graphic types and visual properties
Identified using Saunders typology (22), most tweets (55%) used a combination of two to five graphic types. 42% (n=261) of all tweets were animated as either videos or gifs. As Figure 3 shows, photographs (either still or moving) were most frequently combined with symbols (like company logos). Symbols were also used often in combination with other graphic types. In tweets with only one graphic type, photographs predominated, while diagrams, graphs and models were least used. In 2.6% of tweets, no graphic type was recorded as these tweets used screenshots or text saved in a jpg or png format, which did fit the coding categories (22). In terms of other characteristics, 97% used colour (n=596), 68% (n=418) included text within the image, and 26% (n=159) included a URL.
Table 3. Other Tweet Characteristics
What
|
Total
|
Percentage
|
Used colour
|
597
|
97%
|
Was animated
|
261
|
42%
|
Included text in the visual
|
418
|
68%
|
Included a URL
|
159
|
26%
|
Covid-19 content
The Covid-19 themes of 'detection', 'treatment', 'impact' and 'other' complemented the topic of prevention. Most frequently combined was 'impact' (with tweets communicating how the pandemic was impacting society), and 'detection' (referring to the numbers of Covid-19 infections and how to detect the virus from symptoms). Regarding preventative messages, 'stay home' (44%), and 'wear a mask' (33%) frequented most when tweets only had one message. When combined, as was the case with 45% of the tweets, the preventative measures 'social distancing' and 'wash hands' frequented more. Figure 4 presents these results in more detail
Risk framing & tone over time
Of the 616 tweets analysed from January 1 to October 15, 2020, 69.9% used risk framing to communicate preventative measures. Meaning, they framed messages according to health loss, where the emphasis was on sickness and suffering, or they used health gain framing that emphasised protecting and retaining good health. 5% of tweets used a combination of both. Figure 5 shows that most (57.5%) used health loss framing, particularly around the spikes at the end of January and again in August. Then in terms of tone, 48.9% of tweets were coded showing critique, entertainment or gratitude. Critical tweets, most common from June onwards, were often expressions of disagreement with the lack of preventive measures. For example, critiques of other citizens not wearing masks. Another example was Indian students protesting against exams as preventative measures could not be followed and infection could harm families. In contrast, many tweets around the first half of the year, as shown in Figure 5, had entertaining tones. These tweets showed, for example, humorous instances of quarantine, like a couple pretending to holiday by fishing on their television screen. Lastly, there were also thankful tweets which communicated gratitude for fellow citizens following preventive measures.