Clear Messages, Ambiguous Audiences: Measuring Interpretability in Political Communication

Abstract

Text-based measurement in political research often treats classi6ication disagreement as random noise. We examine this assumption using con6idence-weighted human annotations of 5,000 social media messages by U.S. politicians. We 6ind that political communication is generally highly legible, with mean con6idence exceeding 0.99 across message type, partisan bias, and audience classi6ications. However, systematic variation concentrates in the constituency category, which exhibits a 1.79 percentage point penalty in audience classi6ication con6idence. Given the high baseline of agreement, this penalty represents a sharp relative increase in interpretive uncertainty. Within messages, intent remains clear while audience targeting becomes ambiguous. These patterns persist with politician 6ixed effects, suggesting that measurement error in political text is structured by strategic incentives rather than idiosyncratic coder error.