This PDF file includes:

• Table S1. List of keywords included in the analysis, with their corresponding
  message counts.
• Table S2. Ranking of the keywords included in the analysis according to the strength of the correlation between distance and activity for East Coast cities.
• Table S3. Activity-damage correlations across keywords in order of decreasing
  strength.
• Table S4. Effect of normalization variable choice on the strength of activity-damage relationship (ZCTA resolution).
• Table S5. County-level estimates of damage: Modeling (Hazus-MH) and ex-post
  data on insurance and FEMA individual assistance grants.
• Table S6. Strength of activity-damage correlations for different damage estimates.
• Table S7. Predictive power of sentiment, analyzed at different spatial resolutions and normalized by either area Census population or local Twitter user count (“Twitter population”).
• Table S8. List of the disasters considered in the study, with a description of the damage data available for analysis.
• Table S9. Effect of the activity threshold filter on the strength of the relationship between Twitter activity and damage.
• Table S10. Mutual correlations between sentiment metrics at the level of individual messages.
• Table S11. Top-ranking words by frequency of occurrence in positive and negative messages.
• Table S12. Sentiment as a predictor of damage: Comparison between metrics.
• Fig. S1. Normalized local activity on the topic as a function of distance to the hurricane path.
• Fig. S2. Originality of content, expressed through the fraction of retweets in the stream of messages.
• Fig. S3. Global popularity of local content.
• Fig. S4. Comparison of predictive capacity of activity and sentiment.
• Fig. S5. Comparison of activity-damage correlation strength for different precision levels of geo-location.
• Fig. S6. Average sentiment trends over time: Comparison between sentiment metrics.

Download PDF