Most users do not follow political elites on Twitter; those who do show overwhelming preferences for ideological congruity

We offer comprehensive evidence of preferences for ideological congruity when people engage with politicians, pundits, and news organizations on social media. Using 4 years of data (2016-2019) from a random sample of 1.5 million Twitter users, we examine three behaviors studied separately to date: (i) following of in-group versus out-group elites, (ii) sharing in-group versus out-group information (retweeting), and (iii) commenting on the shared information (quote tweeting). We find that the majority of users (60%) do not follow any political elites. Those who do follow in-group elite accounts at much higher rates than out-group accounts (90 versus 10%), share information from in-group elites 13 times more frequently than from out-group elites, and often add negative comments to the shared out-group information. Conservatives are twice as likely as liberals to share in-group versus out-group content. These patterns are robust, emerge across issues and political elites, and exist regardless of users' ideological extremity.

Automated summary

We offer comprehensive evidence that people on social media have preferences for ideological congruity when engaging with politicians, pundits, and news organizations. Our study shows that the majority of users tend to follow and share information from in-group elites, while holding negative attitudes towards out-group information. Conservatives are also more likely than liberals to share content from in-group sources. These patterns exist across various issues and political elites, independent of the users' ideological extremity.