A mixed-method analysis of the #SugarTax debate on Twitter. Issue 11 (12th August 2021)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bridge, Gemma; Flint, Stuart W; Tench, Ralph
• Is Part Of: Public health nutrition. Volume 24:Issue 11(2021)
• Page Start: 3537
• Page End: 3546
• Publication Date: 2021-08-12
• Subjects: Social network analysis -- Sugar tax -- Health policy -- Social media -- Thematic analysis; Nutrition -- Periodicals; Nutrition policy -- Periodicals; Public health -- Periodicals; 613.2
• DOI: 10.1017/S1368980021000938
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1368-9800

Abstract

Abstract: Objective: To explore the #SugarTax debate on Twitter to assess actors involved, their connections and the topics being discussed during the implementation and first anniversary of the UK Soft Drink Industry Levy. Design: The structure of the #SugarTax debate on Twitter was assessed using social network analysis. The actors involved, their connections and the topics of discussion taking place were also explored using content, sentiment and thematic analyses. Setting: Twitter between 2017 and 2019. Participants: Twitter users engaging in discussions relating to the hashtag 'SugarTax'. Results: Tweets ( n 5366) posted between 5 August 2017 and 7 May 2019 containing #SugarTax were downloaded from Twitter using Network Overview for Discovery and Exploration in Excel. The network included 1883 users, with 686 unique edges and 4679 edges with duplicates. The majority of tweets were negative in sentiment, when assessed by both automatic (64 %, n 141) and manual sentiment analysis (52 %, n 115) methods. Nine key themes were identified and grouped into two groups according to 'support for a sugar or SSB tax' or 'opposition for a sugar or SSB tax'. Conclusions: Twitter was used as a platform for debating the benefits and limitations of sugar-sweetened beverage taxes. The findings indicate that numerous actors are involved in the debates on Twitter, with advocates and lobbyists using the platform to raise support for their campaigns and reshape public perceptions. The findings and the methods used may be of interest to policymakers as well as to academics and members of the public looking to explore and engage in policy debates.