  The COVID-19 pandemic is a global crisis that has been testing every society
and exposing the critical role of local politics in crisis response. In the
United States, there has been a strong partisan divide between the Democratic
and Republican party's narratives about the pandemic which resulted in
polarization of individual behaviors and divergent policy adoption across
regions. As shown in this case, as well as in most major social issues,
strongly polarized narrative frameworks facilitate such narratives. To
understand polarization and other social chasms, it is critical to dissect
these diverging narratives. Here, taking the Democratic and Republican
political social media posts about the pandemic as a case study, we demonstrate
that a combination of computational methods can provide useful insights into
the different contexts, framing, and characters and relationships that
construct their narrative frameworks which individual posts source from.
Leveraging a dataset of tweets from elite politicians in the U.S., we found
that the Democrats' narrative tends to be more concerned with the pandemic as
well as financial and social support, while the Republicans discuss more about
other political entities such as China. We then perform an automatic framing
analysis to characterize the ways in which they frame their narratives, where
we found that the Democrats emphasize the government's role in responding to
the pandemic, and the Republicans emphasize the roles of individuals and
support for small businesses. Finally, we present a semantic role analysis that
uncovers the important characters and relationships in their narratives as well
as how they facilitate a membership categorization process. Our findings
concretely expose the gaps in the "elusive consensus" between the two parties.
Our methodologies may be applied to computationally study narratives in various
domains.
