This study examines tweets (N = 1,103,119) sent by 638 US politicians regarding climate change (N = 10,135). Using data reflecting the risks faced and opinions held by their constituents, the extent to which politicians lead—tweeting about climate change for those most at risk, called trusteeship—or follow—tweeting about climate change for those who are already concerned, called playing to the crowed—is examined. Results reveal that while Democrats generally tweet about climate change more often than Republicans, within each party, tweeting frequency is mostly explained by the level of concern in a politicians’ constituency. Objective risks faced by constituents play no role. Analysis of behavior across different office levels—federal, state, and local—also shows that while federal politicians are more partisan, state and local politicians play to the crowd to a greater degree. Analysis of the tweets shows the politicians’ unequal engagement leads to over-representations of some topics (e.g., “calls for action”) and under-representations of other topics (e.g., criticizing fossil fuels and deniers).

本研究调查 了 638 位美国政客发送的关于气候变化的推文 ( N = 1,103,119) ( N = 10,135）。使用反映其选民面临的风险和观点的数据，政治家的领导程度——为那些面临最大风险的人发布关于气候变化的推文，称为托管——或跟随——为那些已经关注的人发布关于气候变化的推文，称为玩弄拥挤的——被检查。结果显示，虽然民主党人通常比共和党人更频繁地发布有关气候变化的推文，但在每个党内，推文频率主要是由政客选区的关注程度来解释的。三方成员面临的客观风险不起作用。对不同办公室级别（联邦、州和地方）的行为分析还表明，虽然联邦政客更偏向党派，但州和地方政客在更大程度上迎合大众。