The chaos and confusion in the immediate aftermath of Saturday’s assassination attempt of former President Donald Trump led many people to the internet, to seek information or to share their own rumors or conspiracy theories about the unfolding event.
Researchers from the University of Washington’s Center for an Informed Public (CIP) tracked this process, as they do with other crises and breaking news events, to analyze what they call “collective sensemaking,” where people use social media to gather evidence and select frames that shape how they interpret such evidence.
In a blog post Monday, researchers including CIP research manager Danielle Lee Tomson and co-founder Kate Starbird, shared what they learned about early sensemaking after the shooting, what politically coded frames emerged, and how online creators utilized artificial intelligence to create imagery, memes and more.
The post is part of CIP’s ongoing rapid research blogging and analysis about the 2024 U.S. elections. It’s broken into four examples that illustrate the dynamic relationship between evidence and frames during the collective sensemaking process. Here are the highlights:
- Speculation of shooter’s identity and motives: The first questions to emerge in shooting crises, according to CIP, are “who did this and why?” Across such platforms as X and Telegram, rumors about the shooter’s identity spread quickly. Once his identity was officially confirmed, the speculation turned to motive, and right-leaning political framing “sought to paint the perpetrator as motivated by a left-wing agenda and/or anti-Trump rhetoric.” Left-leaning audiences sought to understand and frame the shooter’s motive from an opposing view.
- A spectrum of political frames: Across the political spectrum, commentators often use the same videos, images, eyewitness accounts, and “expert” analyses to support disparate rumors and theories aligned with their political preferences. After the Trump shooting, CIP identified three core politically coded frames emerging online: that it was staged for Trump’s political gain; that it was a failure of duty by law enforcement and the Secret Service; and that it was an inside job.
- Right-wing critiques of mainstream media: Right-wing commentators blamed media outlets for being slow to report the crises for what it turned out to be — an assassination attempt — as initial headlines said Trump was escorted off stage after loud noises at his rally. Others blamed the media for creating a climate for such an attack to happen by framing Trump as a threat to democracy.
- Cultural and commercial production during crises: “Reactionary meme production is a hallmark of any cultural event in the internet era,” CIP researchers wrote. “As creators try to vie for attention during a trending moment or cope with what has happened.” The researchers called out generative AI in particular, saying the technology may be fueling faster generation of shared content, drawing connections to related frames more quickly.
In a briefing about the research with journalists on Monday, Starbird said that she did not think the online reaction showed any signs of intentional manipulation or disinformation from outside state or non-state actors.
“I think what we’ve seen is more of these organic, political-framing contests where people try, almost from the very beginning, to frame the information that’s coming in about the event in a way that benefits their political goals,” Starbird said. “Online influencers do this for two reasons: one, because they’re advancing their political goals, but also it’s a way to get more attention, it’s a way to get a bigger reputation, more followers, these kinds of things.”
The UW researchers concluded that rumors are a natural part of human life, especially during times of crises when emotions are high and facts are uncertain. They said their hope in sharing their findings this week was “not to scold people for sharing rumors, but to help people understand our very human vulnerabilities, especially to intentional manipulation, during times of crisis and social disruption.”