The report prepared by SoL-UC, the social network research center of the Faculty of Communications of the Catholic University, was based on the compilation of all Twitter posts made between July 1 and 14, 2022 (just before the day in which President Gabriel Boric declared the openness of the government to open a new constitutional process before the triumph of the Rejection), they used terms associated with the Approval or Rejection of the proposal for a New Constitution.
Among the more than 50 thousand accounts that participated in these conversations during the mentioned period, the algorithm applied automated relevance criteria, first identifying the 10% of the accounts with the highest PageRank (level of connectivity with nodes that are themselves well connected) and then selecting the 320 accounts with the highest centrality (ability to connect different communities through their interactions). From this, a network of multidimensional interactions was obtained that displays the most relevant users and communities in the conversations on Twitter, revealing the trends that are taking place in the opinions, beyond the bot and digital campaigns.
Overview of Twitter interactions
In the network of interactions, three communities were detected that generally correspond to those who talk about the I Approve option (green), and to two different narratives around Rejection: the first, related to “hard” Rejection with a more republican profile (blue ); and the second, related to a much more diverse sector, which includes profiles of the former concertacionista center-left, self-styled yellow and undecided (purple).
The compact and complex structure of the network shows that these three communities are talking to each other without segregating themselves, contrary to what happened during the final period of past presidential campaigns, where those who supported one candidate interacted relatively little with those who supported the other. other.
In view of the above, Cristián Huepe, Co-director of SoL-UC, highlights that in this dynamic of interactions “We are facing an extremely unusual phenomenon, which had not been generated during the entire 2021 presidential election period or in any other analysis of political conversations developed by SoL-UC, and which consists in the fact that certain emblematic figures from the Approval sector have become part of the Hard Rejection conversation community, because its users constantly mention them to criticize and discredit them”adding that “In this way, the Approval community lacks accounts that are promoting ideas that manage to position themselves at the center of the conversations, to influence beyond their own sector”.
Types of interaction communities
The Approval community has on its periphery the most activist profiles, which include figures from national politics and the art world but who, by interacting little with other communities, are not influencing the broader conversation. More towards the center of the network are very active pro Approve accounts in their own community, but they are also not influencing more transversal discussions that could influence public opinion. “These accounts are dedicating themselves mainly to questioning center and center-left users who were assumed to vote for Approve but have demonstrated for Rejection, without influencing other sectors to expand the network”Huepe points out.
For its part, the Rejection option reveals greater complexity, as it is positioned in two different communities.
The first community (blue) corresponds to the hard core and demarcated republican discourse. Given the nature of their interactions, this has generated an “unprecedented phenomenon” for SoL-UC: the coaptation (or integration) into its community of accounts that could be considered emblematic of Approval, such as @renenaranjo, @giovannaroa, @fernando_atria @ClaudiaPizarro, @patriciapolitz, @Hugo_Gutierrez_ and @gonzalowinter, because they are permanently mentioned by the users of the Rejection to discredit the veracity of their speeches. Among the accounts associated with the most radical rejection that constantly attack Approval are: @Equipo_Patriota, @PanchoOrregoG and @cagazosdeboric
“Of all the years that we have been investigating conversations on a variety of topics in Chile, this is the first time that we have observed that the speeches of one sector are so focused on direct questioning of figures from the opposing community, that the aforementioned accounts end up being co-opted, without managing to establish influential interactions with their own political sector”affirms the also researcher of the Faculty of Communications of the UC.
The second community in which Rejection is positioned (purple) shows the most transversal scope that this option has achieved, since it mostly represents a “moderate Rejection”, is located at the center of the network of conversations and integrates a wide variety of actors and complex discussions around the constituent text. In this community we find various accounts of users who used to be undecided, but have now spoken out for the Rejection, many of them strongly linked to the former Concertación. There are also users who identify themselves as “Yellow” and undecided who participate in conversations about the contingency and the text of the New Constitution. In addition, several actors in the political contingency of recent weeks appear as relevant nodes, such as @ximerincon either @matiaswalkerp, the ones that connect with a large part of the system and have high PageRank. Finally, we find in this community influential profiles on Twitter such as @rcastillomurill, @jgalempartewhich have positioned themselves as important poles of conversation around contingency.
The Approval scenario and the impact of political contingency
For Cristián Huepe, both the network in general, as well as the diversity of actors and discourses present in the purple community, of the “Moderate Rejection”, reveal that during these weeks the Approvebo community has lost ground. Despite having relevant figures from politics and national culture, it is not managing to influence beyond its niches in the conversations about the constitutional process. However, he also points out that “The change in discourse that the government has shown, based on the President’s statements last Friday, July 15, could generate new dynamics of interaction and communities, since the fraction of accounts that supports one or the other option still seems to be Similary”.
Finally, the expert in complex systems points out that “It is striking that, in weeks where the contingency has focused on the positioning for the Approval or Rejection of political parties and prominent actors, these news have not had a relevant influence on digital conversations on social networks”adding that, “Instead, the debate is centering on disputes over who spreads truthful content, with each side accusing the other of spreading fake news.”
