In an era dominated by social media discourse, the conversation surrounding invasive species is markedly shaped not by ecological urgency but by the allure of charismatic megafauna, emotionally charged narratives, and influential public figures. A comprehensive study conducted by an expansive international team of researchers reveals that social media platforms, specifically Twitter, serve as an arena where a small contingent of voices—merely 1% of users—are responsible for generating a staggering 60% of retweeted content related to invasive species. This disproportionate concentration of influence underscores the pivotal role that a limited number of accounts play in shaping public perspectives on environmental issues.
Analyzing over half a million social media posts spanning a decade and a half, the research unveils a significant bias towards species that captivate the public through their striking appearances, distinctive behaviors, or familiar status. This phenomenon aligns with a recognized ecological concept known as “plant blindness,” where plant species, despite constituting the majority of endangered organisms and harboring many of the most harmful invasive variants, remain vastly underrepresented in public and scientific dialogues. The research findings demonstrate a glaring absence of invasive plant species among the top 15 most discussed invasive organisms on Twitter, highlighting a critical gap in public awareness and engagement.
This disparity carries substantial implications for conservation strategies and funding. Dr. Susan Canavan, lead author and Honorary Researcher at the School of Natural Sciences at the University of Galway, emphasizes the challenges posed by the invisibility of invasive plants in public discourse. She articulates that while some of the most destructive invasive species are plants, their inability to capture public imagination significantly hampers efforts to garner support for their management and control. This gap is further reflected in the stark imbalance of conservation funding, where plants receive less than 4%, a shortfall that social media attention patterns appear to both reflect and perpetuate.
The study also sheds light on the types of social media accounts that dominate the conversation around invasive species. Major news organizations such as The New York Times and CNN, along with governmental conservation agencies and recognized ecology experts, form part of this influential group. Intriguingly, the conversation is also heavily influenced by celebrity personalities and social media influencers lacking formal conservation expertise. For example, the viral reach of YouTuber Logan Paul, who posted content about spearfishing for invasive lionfish in Belize, exemplifies how celebrity-driven narratives can shape public understanding. This dual-edged phenomenon carries potential benefits for broader engagement but also presents risks related to the accuracy and nuance of ecological information disseminated.
The researchers utilized Twitter’s previously free academic API access, enabling an unprecedented scale of data analysis in understanding public engagement with invasive species topics. The clarity provided by this large-scale social media dataset unveils patterns that were only speculated upon before, offering insights into which species and stories capture widespread attention. This knowledge is vital for refining conservation communication strategies, as it reveals that the vast majority of public interest gravitates towards animals embedded in compelling and often dramatic human narratives.
Examples abound of how emotionally resonant stories magnify public involvement. The case of hippos in Colombia vividly illustrates this dynamic: originally imported illegally by notorious drug cartel leader Pablo Escobar for his private menagerie, these non-native animals proliferated after his death, becoming an ecological concern in the Rio Magdalena watershed. Media exposure and social media discussions surrounding whether to cull the hippos sparked vehement opposition, ultimately influencing policymakers to abandon the culling plan. Such narratives underscore how storytelling entwined with charismatic species can decisively sway conservation debates.
Conversely, plants, despite being crucial components of ecosystems and frequently representing some of the most lethal invasive species, rarely evoke comparable public attention. This neglect extends to their portrayal on social media, which affects both public perception and policy prioritization. This lack of visibility endangers scientific management efforts and conservation funding allocation for invasive plants, creating a self-reinforcing cycle of ecological oversight.
The phenomenon where domesticated animals become focal points in invasive species conversations is also notable. Cats, for instance, top the list of most mentioned species on Twitter. While cherished as pets, domestic and feral cats have contributed to the extinction of at least 63 species globally and are responsible for the deaths of over a billion birds annually in the United States alone. Despite these stark ecological impacts, discussions surrounding the management of cat populations remain contentious and heavily intertwined with ethical considerations and public sentiment, further complicating conservation efforts.
Other mammals frequently spotlighted include dogs, squirrels, goats, rats, and horses, with feral domestic pigs also drawing attention due to their economic and environmental ramifications in regions such as the United States. The prominence of these species in social media discourse further illustrates the skewed focus on animals, particularly those that resonate on a cultural or emotional level with the public.
The research also identifies episodic spikes in conversation driven by viral events. A prominent example is the 2020 “mystery seeds” incident in the United States, where unsolicited seed packages, reportedly originating from China, were sent to thousands of recipients. This event sparked widespread biosecurity concerns amidst fears of ecological and agricultural threats. Eventually determined to be a “brushing scam”—a fraudulent marketing tactic designed to create fake reviews—the event nonetheless triggered extensive public engagement and prompted Amazon to ban the sale of imported plants and seeds. These viral episodes elucidate how sudden bursts of social media activity can shape discourse and influence policy, regardless of scientific contexts.
Another notable observation from the study is the critical importance of maintaining access to social media data for academic research. As online platforms evolve and data policies become more restrictive, scientists risk losing vital tools that enable real-time monitoring and understanding of public perceptions and behaviors surrounding environmental issues. The research team appeals to social media companies to preserve and enhance data access provisions, emphasizing that insights drawn from such analyses not only enhance conservation outcomes but also deepen societal environmental awareness.
In conclusion, this exhaustive analysis, published in the journal Ecology and Society, elucidates a fundamental challenge in modern conservation communication: the divergence between scientific priorities and public engagement catalyzed by social media dynamics. The phenomena of concentrated influence, emotive storytelling, and celebrity involvement profoundly shape how invasive species are perceived, overshadowing urgent ecological imperatives, especially concerning invasive plants. Understanding and addressing these disparities is essential to bridging the gap between scientific knowledge and public action, ultimately fostering more effective environmental stewardship.
Subject of Research:
Not applicable
Article Title:
From habitats to hashtags: examining online discussions about invasive species
News Publication Date:
24-Oct-2025
Web References:
https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-16508-300413
References:
Not explicitly provided beyond web references
Image Credits:
Not provided
Keywords:
Ecology
