Tracking Online Discourse: Economic Opportunity and Racial Justice

Similar Resources:

Communications Toolkit
Published: 2018

Find out how people are talking about poverty and race online so you can develop messaging for your racial and economic justice advocacy. The diagrams below come from Crimson Hexagon, a leading social media analytics software. They analyze specific content from Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, popular blogs, news sites, and more. Since the beginning of 2018, there have been between 2-3 million posts each month about economic and racial justice, which have been seen potentially 14 billion times (i.e. “impressions”). Using information about these posts, The Amp webpage provides daily insights about the volume, sentiment, and demographics of audiences engaging in online discussions on race and poverty. You can use this information to participate more effectively in these conversations and use values-based messaging to bring “persuadable” audiences to our side (read more here).


The bar chart below provides a breakdown of the current tone of online conversations about both race and poverty. Crimson Hexagon's sentiment analysis categorizes social media content into positive (supportive of people living in poverty), neutral, and negative (unsupportive of people living in poverty) sentiments based on the language and context of social media posts.




Topic Word Cloud

The word cloud displays words that are most commonly associated with conversations about poverty and race.





Crimson Hexagon also analyzes the demography of audiences in particular online discussions. The charts below provides estimates of the gender of audiences currently engaging in online discussions about poverty and race.



State-Level Conversations about Poverty

This map compares the number of conversations about poverty in each state. The color inside each state represents the chance that a conversation on social media relates to poverty. Green states have a higher chance of talking about poverty, while red states have a lower chance. This information quantifies the opportunity for advocates to discuss economic and racial justice with others who are already engaged with these topics. At the same time, it shows which states need more discussion around these issues.