Shifting narrative strategies: How monument advocates change their stories in response to conflict over time

Abstract

AbstractThis paper expands the Narrative Policy Framework (NPF) by employing an exploratory case study approach to examine the construction of narratives temporally. A large‐N Twitter dataset concerning the Bears Ears and Grand Staircase‐Escalante monuments controversy is utilized to examine the question: how does the use of narrative strategies change over time? Through the application of change‐point analysis, we determine time points of significant shifts towards use of the devil‐angel shift, scope of the conflict, and causal mechanism strategies. Overall, we find that organizations do not vary their use of narrative strategies over the course of a policy conflict but instead demonstrate discrete changes in response to certain policy events. Based on our findings, we conclude with suggestions for refining and expanding NPF hypotheses. Specifically, we recommend a more contextual analysis of shifts in narrative strategy use in response to specific events over time.