rethinkTHC Search
Menu
Study breakdown

Spanish-language Twitter discourse heavily favored cannabis regulation while underemphasizing health risks

Cross SectionalPreliminary evidence
The takeaway

Analysis of nearly 36,000 Spanish-language tweets about cannabis found 73% favored regulation while only 20% discussed negative health effects, revealing a pro-legalization bias in online discourse.

Public health communicators, social media researchers, drug policy analysts in Spanish-speaking regions

73% pro-regulation vs 20% discussing health risks

What the researchers found

Among 35,527 analyzed Spanish-language tweets about cannabis (2018-2022), 73.2% favored cannabis regulation while only 3.5% expressed opposition. Only 20.4% discussed negative effects on physical or mental health. Regarding therapeutic use, 30.1% were in favor while 69.9% were neutral or against. Significant differences emerged between user types and between cannabis consumers versus non-consumers.

Why it matters

Social media shapes public perception of cannabis, and the significant imbalance between pro-regulation content (73%) and health risk discussion (20%) suggests online discourse may not reflect the full scientific picture. This has implications for how the public forms opinions about legalization.

The numbers in context

68,673 total tweets; 35,527 analyzed; 73.2% favored regulation; 3.5% opposed; 20.4% discussed negative health effects; 30.1% supported therapeutic use; tweets from 2018-2022

How the study worked

Dataset of tweets posted 2018-2022 in Spanish containing keywords "cannabis," "marihuana," or "hachis." A 500-post subset per keyword was manually coded to establish a codebook, then machine learning classified the remaining 67,173 tweets. After excluding irrelevant tweets, 35,527 were analyzed.

What this study cannot tell us

Twitter users are not representative of the general population. Machine learning classification may misclassify tweets. Spanish-language tweets span multiple countries with different cultural contexts and legal frameworks. 2018-2022 timeframe may not reflect current discourse.

How to read the evidence

Large dataset with machine learning classification provides interesting descriptive findings, but Twitter populations are not representative and machine learning coding may introduce systematic errors.

When this study was published

2025 publication analyzing tweets from 2018-2022

The bigger picture

As more Spanish-speaking countries and regions consider cannabis regulation, the online information environment is heavily weighted toward pro-legalization perspectives with limited health risk discussion. This mirrors patterns seen in English-language social media and may influence policy decisions.

Questions still open

  • Does the pro-regulation bias in social media discourse influence public health policy outcomes in Spanish-speaking countries? Would health-focused counter-messaging on social media change public risk perception?

Common questions

Why does this matter for public health?
If most online cannabis discourse emphasizes legalization benefits while downplaying health risks, people forming opinions through social media may develop an incomplete understanding of the tradeoffs involved in cannabis regulation.
Did consumers and non-consumers tweet differently?
Yes. The study found significant differences in perspectives between cannabis consumers and non-consumers, as well as between different types of Twitter users, though specific differences were not detailed in the abstract.

Read the original research

Understanding the online landscape of cannabis discourse: a Twitter analysis.

Frontiers in public health, 13, 1416171

Citation

Alvarez-Mon, Miguel Angel; Ojeda, Carla; Lara-Abelenda, Francisco; Asunsolo Del Barco, Ángel; Fraile-Martínez, Oscar; García-Montero, Cielo; Fernández-Rojo, Sonia; Quintero, Javier; Ortega, Miguel Angel; Alvarez-Mon, Melchor; Mora, Fernando. (2025). Understanding the online landscape of cannabis discourse: a Twitter analysis.. Frontiers in public health, 13, 1416171. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2025.1416171