Giffords and GQR Social Listening Efforts Around Gun Violence and the Election

Peter Ambler

After a year of protests and heated political debate, Giffords shares the concern of many in the gun violence prevention community that today’s contentious political climate and its impact on online conversation may make gun violence more likely at the polls.

The Giffords Law Center’s state-by-state analysis of laws surrounding the brandishing of firearms and voter intimidation highlights signs that “armed individuals are still likely to be present at the polls this fall, possibly in greater numbers than ever before.” As we saw in Kenosha, incidents of gun violence following protests and counter-protests are often preceded by early warning signs on social media. In acknowledgment of the intersection of offline and online events, Giffords is partnering with experts in social listening at GQR to identify explicit and implicit calls to arms or references to gun violence that may post direct threats or make gun violence more likely on Election Day.

This memo overviews topline findings from GQR’s social media listening, including a review of publicly available data across major platforms around conversations related to potential gun violence. When specific threats are identified, Giffords is notifying officials and partners to help mitigate conditions that may lead to gun violence. Closed briefings overviewing GQR’s findings and recommendations on how to best prepare for safe and secure voting are available for partners, campaigns, local officials, and local media upon request.

What We Are Seeing

Social media platforms have recently taken steps that may limit the threat of gun violence. For example, Facebook announced it would take action against some militia and extremist groups and remove content that “uses militarized language or suggests the goal is to intimidate, exert control, or display power over election officials or voters.” YouTube recently announced it would partially ban QAnon, a conspiracy group with a history of inspiring gun violence. These changes are the result of months of advocacy from researchers and activists.

Research conducted throughout 2020 shows that platforms have a history of inconsistent policy enforcement and often fail to account for the most heavily targeted communities. A recent study from the Institute of Strategic Dialogue found that women, especially women of color, remain disproportionately likely to face violent threats online. Additionally, research consistently demonstrates that extreme groups advocating violence often easily find ways around platform policies. In early September, Trump-backed GOP congressional candidate Marjorie Taylor Green posted a doctored image of herself holding a gun and standing next to three Democratic congresswomen, all women of color. Facebook eventually took down the post.

New reports confirm that the latest changes from Facebook around violence are proving insufficient. Even with these new changes, content on social media implicitly or explicitly referencing gun violence is still too common and too easy to find. Giffords calls on social media platforms, including Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter, to consistently enforce recently enacted policies and to be responsive to experts’ assessment of where the policies and enforcement fail.

Our monitoring points to five trends we continue to watch closely:

Calls to prepare for a “civil war.” Troubling mentions of “civil war” spiked on social media several times this year following pushback on COVID stay-at-home orders, Black Lives Matter protests, and increased organizing among extremist groups on social media. Of the over 13.9 million posts about “civil war” so far this year, about 8% also included references to guns, weapons, or commonly used language in gun activist communities. This excludes commentary from closed groups and encrypted spaces where extremist communities are more likely to organize.

The chart below shows that mentions of “civil war” on Twitter and other social media channels spiked significantly after President Trump’s call for extremist group Proud Boys to “stand back and stand by” during the first presidential debate. In large part, the Twitter portion of this spike is driven by the media’s coverage of calls for civil war or theorizing about whether Trump’s reaction to different election scenarios will lead to civil war. However, comments on other platforms and in comment sections contain language reacting to commentary with references to coming armed and prepared to the polls.

Reaction to Trump and GOP calls to action. Trump and other GOP candidates have issued explicit and implicit calls to arms, allegedly in defense of the polls. Following Trump’s debate comments that white supremacist groups like the Proud Boys should “stand back and stand by,” members posted emboldened remarks, some referencing guns, on social media. In another example, GOP congressional candidate and conspiracy enthusiast Lauren Boebert calling for voters to “defend” the election and “join an army.” Comments included charged remarks like “remember to bring your AR-15.”
Protests and hypothetical protests yielding calls to arms.Warnings or false flags of potential violence in connection with planned protests are increasing across social media. Ahead of the October 10 demonstrations that led to gun violence in Denver, our listening signaled that organizers were suggesting that people “expect violence” and purported that the counter-protesters were planning for violence as well. The violence that followed illustrates that social media-based incitements often precede real-world violence.

Reaction to daily political events and rumors. Publicized threats, media attention, and actual incidents of violence are increasing social media conversation around the role of guns. The recent plot to kidnap Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer reignited the debate over the role of guns in public life, as the individuals arrested were previously seen carrying guns at the Michigan capitol.

Veiled threats using jokes and humor. Research suggests that jokes and humor in the context of gun violence may make gun violence more likely. Listening shows some social media users are responding to protest event invitations with water gun emojis or replying to calls for nonviolence with memes suggesting they are “into that sh**.”

What We Can Do

Giffords is first and foremost focused on the safety of American voters, and will report all threats of gun or other types of violence to law enforcement. GQR recommends the following steps for allied partners who encounter a threat of gun violence or the incitement of violence on social media:

Point the public towards accurate information about Election Day.Direct individuals to trusted sources regarding voter rights and voter intimidation as often as possible. Be sure that resources include state-specific points of contact for reporting activity.
Use existing law to keep armed threats away from voting. Giffords Law Center has compiled an exhaustive resource of laws in all 50 states and DC that prohibit guns at polling places and/or prohibit the use of firearms to intimidate or threaten. These laws can and should be utilized by state and local lawmakers to protect voting.
Reassure voters on what election authorities and law enforcement are doing to protect them.Any communication about violent incidents should include information on how voting is protected, including limits on poll watchers, the severe criminal penalties for harassing or intimidating voters, and local law enforcement’s role in ensuring a safe voting environment.

Use caution on social media. Organizations and their members should exhibit restraint and caution when engaging with social media commentary containing threats of gun violence. Consider whether moving that content into more newsfeeds is escalating the threat. Social media users alarmed by problematic content should report what they see to local law enforcement and officials and to social media platforms. Additionally, we recommend that organizations follow up with a representative from the relevant platform due to inadequacies with in-app reporting. Giffords is available to connect organizations with a point of contact at relevant social media platforms, if needed.

Focus on motives when calling out messages of violence. If expressing outrage about content you see online, focus on the motives of the messenger rather than repeating the messages encouraging the use of guns or threats of violence. Avoid moving dangerous messaging by only sharing it with labeling that obstructs the threatening imagery or language, or indicating the claims are false.

Giffords and GQR are available to brief partners, local campaigns, law enforcement, and media. For more information, email media@giffords.org.