An analysis of social media responses by NRA-sponsored members of Congress after the Las Vegas shootings
53 thoughts. 209 prayers.
After any mass shooting, there’s typically an outpouring of frustration in America about “thoughts and prayers” provided by members of Congress. This frustration tends to take the form of viral, anecdotal sharing, which doesn’t adequately describe the care and concern our elected officials transmit to the voting public. In fact, it’s possible that some thoughts and prayers simply get lost in the other communications our Representatives and Senators share with us every day!
I certainly don’t want any elected official to feel that we don’t value their responses in fair measure. Therefore, to ensure that we all understand just what is being expressed, I conducted a casual research project to quantify it. Within 48 hours of the mass shooting in Las Vegas at Mandalay Bay, I examined social media activity (Twitter, Facebook) from members of Congress. There are far more of them than I could adequately research in a short timeframe, of course, so I focused on those who have accepted campaign donations from the National Rifle Association.
I compiled their tweets and Facebook posts directly relating to the mass shooting (with tweets taking priority), then reviewed the language to see which words were used most often.
The findings
240 Congresspeople who have received a total of $3,204,014 from the NRA (232 Republicans, 8 Democrats) offered comments about the Las Vegas mass shooting (59 dead, 527 injured) within 48 hours of the attack. Within their statements:
- Condolences/sympathies: 24 mentions
- Thoughts: 53
- Prayers: 209
Other high-performing terms:
- Devastated/ing: 14 instances
- Evil: 22
- Direct mention of God or quoted scripture: 14
- Heart (plus heartbroken, heartbreaking, heartfelt): 67
- Horror (plus horrific, horrendous, horrifying): 95
- Innocent: 15
- Sad or saddened: 18
- Senseless: 53
- Shock, shocked: 10
- Terrible: 12
- Tragedy or tragic: 79
- Violence: 40
Other observations
I found 6 officials in this segment of Congress who don’t appear to use social media at all, 6 who haven’t been active on social media in the last few days, and 29 who have communicated in social media since the event but did not comment on Las Vegas.
One statement (only one) mentioned feelings of anger.
A few used the term “countless lives” as they reflected on what America has lost to gun violence. To avoid that pesky vagueness problem, here’s a primer on some of the casualties that have, indeed, been counted. (A teaser: “Since [Sandy Hook], there have been at least, 1,518 mass shootings, with at least 1,715 people killed and 6,089 wounded.”
In the same timeframe, numerous members of Congress posted in support — often in multiple posts/tweets — of the Pain Capable Unborn Child Protection Act, which just passed in the House. Their wording focused on the sanctity of life and the importance of protecting the innocent, the vulnerable, and the defenseless.
Where did the data come from?
I began with this infographic from the Washington Post, which cites ProPublica and the Center for Responsive Politics as sources. The dollar amounts represent total NRA campaign donations from 1998 to 2016. Of course, this is a mere drop in the bucket compared to the NRA’s more wide-ranging influence, so please think of these dollar figures as a humble — yet visible — starting point.
I found a few errors in the Post’s compilation. It listed nine individuals who are not currently in office. (I omitted those individuals and their donated funds from the tallies.) The data set also focuses on Congress, not the rest of the administration — and it doesn’t include members of Congress who either declined NRA donations or re-donated those donations elsewhere.
Why focus on social media?
Social media has become a key component in modern communications. The vast majority of Americans use Twitter or Facebook in some fashion. Likewise, the majority of elected officials have embraced these platforms to communicate with constituents about their campaign efforts and their work. (In fact, I’m sure you’ll agree that our very own President has set quite the forward-thinking example with his use of Twitter.)
The Twitter format, limited to 140 characters for now, does present a challenge — but this was no barrier to those who wished to share a longer statement. Many officials sent sequential tweets to convey their full statements, attached an image of a longer message, or linked to statements hosted elsewhere. Two posted attractive, custom-made graphics that urged readers to “#PrayForVegas”. One busy Representative saved time and retweeted Speaker Paul Ryan’s statement instead of issuing one of his own.
Social media transmissions don’t adequately reflect everything our elected officials do for our country, of course, but they’re an important, very common, and expected means of maintaining timely communications with the American public. I feel that it’s entirely fair to examine this means of connection closely.
Conclusions
The numbers you see here might not accurately reflect the amounts of thoughts, prayers, and condolences currently in circulation. I tried to ensure that all statements were evaluated in a consistent manner, but there were a few spots of grey area. In fact, one Representative from the list appears to have deleted his tweet already. (If you’re a member of Congress and you’re concerned that you’ve been overlooked, I sincerely apologise! Please send your thoughts and prayers directly, and I’ll add them right away.)
The high usage of the terms “horror” (95), “senseless” (53), and “tragedy” (79) and their close variants suggests that the hearts (67) of these officials are responding to the event with deep emotion. I respect their humanity and vulnerability, just as I grieve with our leadership and the rest of America every single time an avoidable mass shooting happens. As such, I eagerly await voting record data that correlates those feelings, thoughts, and prayers with concrete action on behalf of (if I may borrow a few terms) protecting the innocent, the vulnerable, and the defenseless. (To be clear, I mean people, not the gun market sector.)
