US Congressmembers’ responses on X to mass shooting events differ along party lines

(Press-News.org) Democratic congressmembers are significantly more likely to post on social media following a mass shooting event in the US compared to Republican congressmembers, according to a study published December 17, 2025 in the open-access journal PLOS Global Public Health by Dmytro Bukhanevych from New York University, United States, and colleagues.

Social media is now a key tool for politicians to communicate directly with the public, especially in the wake of important events. Previous studies have shown that voters perceive social media posts from politicians as more honest compared to news interviews. Here, the authors assessed how members of the US Congress responded to mass shooting events (as defined by the Gun Violence Archive, where four or more people, excluding the shooter, were shot) on social media. Guns are a divisive topic in the United States, with Democrats tending to call for stricter gun control laws, and Republicans citing the Second Amendment as rationale for keeping guns relatively unrestricted.

The authors focused specifically on X (formerly known as Twitter), in part because of X’s owner Elon Musk’s political work for the current Trump administration. They analyzed 785,881 posts from 513 congressmembers (262 Democrats and 251 Republicans) of the 117th Congress using X from January 2, 2021 to January 3, 2023. (Independents and congressmembers without X accounts were excluded from the analysis.)

In total, 1,338 mass shooting incidents took place during the 117th Congress, and congressmembers made 12,274 posts containing gun-related keywords: gun, second amendment, 2nd Amendment, and firearm. The authors found mass shootings with more fatalities had a higher probability of congressmembers making gun-related posts, especially if the shooting happened in the members’ state. Democrats were more likely to tweet about guns following mass shootings than Republicans (OR=3.60, 95% CI=[3.03, 4.28], p < 0.001), and the authors also found clear differences in post content between parties. Democrats tended to frame posts in terms of community, families, victims, and legislature, while Republicans more often addressed Second Amendment rights, law enforcement, and crime in their posts.

The authors note they were only able to examine a small subset of the variables that might impact an individual’s response to a tragedy like a mass shooting. They also note that another session of Congress might respond differently.

Regardless, this research provides valuable insight into how political communication around mass shootings in the United States is carried out in one of the highest levels of US government.  

Senior author Dr. Maurizio Porfiri summarizes: "In this research, we tested a long-running concern: when it comes to gun violence, Americans too often talk past each other instead of with each other. In posts from members of the 117th Congress on X (formerly Twitter) after mass shootings, the pattern was clear. Party identity shaped what they prioritized. Democrats more often centered victims and policy action, while Republicans more often emphasized rights and crime. When leaders frame the same tragedies so differently, it's harder to find shared ground for meaningful solutions. That's why good-faith engagement matters, especially as consensus grows harder to reach."

  

In your coverage please use this URL to provide access to the freely available article in PLOS Global Public Health: https://plos.io/4rMFyUo

Citation: Bukhanevych D, Succar R, Porfiri M (2025) How do mass shootings shape the social media discourse on guns in the US Congress? Causal discovery and topic modeling. PLOS Glob Public Health 5(12): e0005493. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pgph.0005493

Author Countries: United States

Funding: R.S. and M.P. were supported by the National Science Foundation under grant number CMMI-1953135 (awarded to M.P.). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

 

END