The document summarizes key findings from a study on how internet users search for and access political information online across 7 countries. Some of the main findings are that search engines are the most common way people find political information online, users report getting information from multiple sources both online and offline, and they frequently check facts and information from different sources. The study also found that relatively few users actively block or censor others online due to differing political views. It concludes that concerns about "filter bubbles" and "echo chambers" are often overhyped and that most users are discerning in how they evaluate online information.

1. Fake News, Echo Chambers, and Filter
Bubbles: Research and Policy
William H. Dutton @BiIIDutton
Quello Professor of Media and Information Policy
Quello Center, Michigan State University
@QuelloCenter
Presentation for a workshop at Bruegel on fake news and filter
bubbles, Brussels, 25 October 2017.

2. Panic
Fake
News
Filter
Bubbles
Echo
Chambers
Immediatefuture.co.uk
Medium.com

3. The Part Played by Search in Shaping Political Opinion
• Quello Center team in collaboration with the Oxford
Internet Institute (OII), University of Oxford and
Department of Communication, University of Ottawa
• Professor William H. Dutton (Quello)
• Dr. Bianca C. Reisdorf (Quello)
• Dr. Grant Blank (OII)
• Dr. Elizabeth Dubois (Ottawa)
• With the assistance of:
• Craig Robertson (PhD Student, Quello)
• Sabrina Ahmed (BA Student, Ottawa)
• Support from Google, with thanks to Jon Steinberg

4. Centrality of Information to
Democratic Processes
Mass Media
•News, Radio, Television, and the Fourth
Estate
The Internet and Search
•Search Engines, Algorithms, Social
Media, User Choice, and a Fifth Estate

5. The Role of the Internet, Search and
Social Media?
Enable citizens to make well political
decisions?
Distort the information citizens gain
access to and choose in taking
political decisions and actions?

6. Technological Determinism
• More Informed Rational Citizens, Voters
• Social Media Movements, Surges
• Filter Bubbles
Social Determinism
• Spiral of Silence
• Power Law
• Echo Chambers
Social and Technical Shaping of Democratic Processes
• Agenda Setting
• Cue Taking and Giving (“group think”) - Two-Step Flow
• Werther Effects
• Fifth Estate (enabled by search and social media)
Multiple Theoretical Perspectives

7. Cross-National Comparative Research
A User-Centered Perspective
Review of
Literature
Trace
Data
Survey of
7 nations
Britain
France
Germany
Italy
Poland
Spain
United States
14,000 Internet
Users, January
2017

8. Mitigating
Problems
Centrality of Search
for Info about
Politics
Diversity of
Sources/Viewpoints
Check, Confirm,
Information
Finding Info that is
New, Unexpected, or
Wrong
Seldom Block,
Unfriend, Censor
Others
Fifth Estate, Not
Mass Media
You are the ‘first
algorithm’
KEY
THEMES

9. The Centrality of Search
Origins in WWW as Mountain of Trash
Becoming the first place people go for information
One of the most common uses of the Internet
Politics is a limited, specialized topic of search

10. Frequency of Using a Search Engine
France Germany Italy Poland Spain UK US Total
Never
1.4 0.14 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.5 1.1 0.54
Less than monthly
1.4 2.02 0.8 0.1 0.6 2.5 3 1.5
Monthly
1.8 2.4 0.8 0.2 1.4 2.4 2.4 1.62
Weekly
12.1 17.5 6.9 2.7 6.5 14.2 11.3 10.1
Daily
22.5 28.9 19.3 21.8 19.8 24.3 20 22.4
Greater than once per day
60.9 49.0 72.1 75 71.4 56.2 62.3 63.85
Total N
1,972 1,972 1,979 1,992 1,989 1,961 1,995 13,859
Total percent
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

11. The Purpose of Search
3.19
3.19
3.22
3.44
3.57
3.66
3.87
3.97
0 1 2 3 4
Mean results out of 5
Find entertaining content
Politics and current events
Medical or health questions
Check accuracy of news,info
Look up news on topic, event
Look up fact(s)
Navigation to sites
Info about particular topic
0=never; 4=very often

12. The Reliability of Search:
A Learned Level of Trust
As reliable as other major sources, e.g., TV
Users in Poland, Italy, and Spain more trusting
Users in Germany, France, and Britain less trusting
One of first places to go for information about politics

13. Reliability of Different Sources
2.69
3.35
3.41
3.41
3.47
3.49
3.52
0 1 2 3 4
Mean results out of 5
Social media
Television
Newspapers
Online news
Family, friends, colleagues
Radio
Search engine results
0=not reliable at all; 4=totally reliable

14. Reliability of Search Engine Results
France Germany Italy Poland Spain UK US Total
1 Total unreliable
2.6 2.6 1.7 0.7 0.7 1.5 1.1 1.5
2
7.9 8.3 5.6 6.1 7.5 6.9 5.7 6.8
3
39.9 44.8 37 36.6 36.9 40.7 39 39.2
4
40.7 38.1 46.9 46.8 44.8 42.6 42.8 43.3
5 Total reliable
9 6.3 8.9 9.8 10.1 8.3 11.4 9.1
Total N
1,910 1,920 1,938 1,958 1,966 1,895 1,950 13,537
Total percent
100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100

15. The Diversity of Sources
Those interested in politics look at
multiple (4.5) sources of information
More than two (2.4) offline, and more
than two (2.1) online
Search engines: most frequent online
source

16. Multiple Sources of Information about Politics
1.53
1.82
2.13
2.24
2.31
2.50
2.51
N
ever
Som
etim
es
O
ften
Very
often
Mean results out of 4
Charities, religious groups
Political websites
Radio
Print news
Family & friends
Online sources
TV

17. Online Sources of Information about Politics
2.36
2.52
2.54
2.88
3.02
3.07
3.49
N
ever
R
arely
Som
etim
es
O
ften
Very
often
Mean results out of 5
Political website
Email
Online video platforms
Social media
Online sites of news & mags
Online news sites
Search engines

18. Diversity of Views Encountered Online
36 percent of sample read news they disagree
with ‘often’ or ‘very often'’
Diversity of Views Among People Communicated
with Online (Table 4.25)
• 15%: Views Different from you
• 65%: Mixed Beliefs
• 20%: Same as you

19. Users Check, Confirm, Information
Multiple approaches to confirming
information
Over 80 percent use search to check facts
Three fourths (74%) use search to check
information on social media

20. Practices Tied to Confirming a Story
2.70
2.87
2.92
3.08
3.15
3.16
N
ever
R
arely
Som
etim
es
O
ften
Very
often
Mean results out of 5
Look for opinion of trusted source
Ask friend or family to confirm
Check different news sources
Check major offline news
Confirm by searching online
Read something disagree with

21. Finding Information
Unexpected, New, and Wrong
76 percent occasionally or often find information they
were not looking for (serendipity) through search
48 percent ‘often’ learn something new – serendipity
Many recognize ‘wrong’ information
Occasionally change their opinion on issues

22. Relative Prevalence of Practices
1.27
1.68
2.13
2.35
0 .5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Mean results out of 5
Changed opinion on political issue
Find wrong information
Discovered important information
Learn something new
0=never; 3=often

23. Rarely Block or Unfriend
20 percent have unfriended or blocked someone who posted
because of differing political views or offensive content
12 percent block or unfriended a person who disagree with
political content they posted
15 percent posted content they worried would offend friends
or people they follow

24. Mitigating
Problems
Centrality of Search
for Info about
Politics
Diversity of
Sources/Viewpoints
Check, Confirm,
Information
Finding Info that is
New, Unexpected, or
Wrong
Seldom Block,
Unfriend, Censor
Others
Fifth Estate, Not
Mass Media
You are the ‘first
algorithm’
KEY
THEMES

25. • Google Studie
• Forschungsfragen
• Methodologie
• Erste Resultate
• Bedeutung
• Diskussion
Factors Shaping Individual Differences in Search

26. Factors Shaping Good Internet & Search Practices
in the Political Arena
Political
• Interest in Politics
• Online political participation
Internet
• Skills
• Levels of Internet Use
• Mobile, Next Generation Users
Information
• Diversity of Sources
• Learned Level of Trust

27. Operationalizing those ‘Vulnerable’
Interest in Politics: ‘Not at all’ v. ‘Somewhat
Interested, Interested, Very Interested’
Skill: Ability to use a search engine: ‘Bad, Fair, or
Poor’ v ‘Good or Excellent’
IF: Not at all interested in politics AND
Bad/Fair/Poor ability THEN rated VULNERABLE

28. Percent Vulnerable (No Interest, Low Skill)
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4
US
France
Poland
Britain
Spain
Germany
Italy
Vulnerables
Vulnerable
Vulnerable
compose from
1-4% of
Internet Users

29. The Vulnerables?
The ‘vulnerables’ tend to be somewhat:
• Older, less educated, no children in home, retired,
unemployed, female
• Lower income, some disability
However, ‘vulnerables’ scattered across all
categories
• Difficult to target by demographics
• Socially identify, alert to problems, and nudge to develop
interests and skills

30. Nudging* Internet Users:
Encourage an interest in politics; make it interesting
Don’t undermine trust by demonizing the Internet and search
Recommend consulting multiple sources, on- and off-line
Identify good online practices
• Use the Internet and search
• Value diversity of views and social networks
• Check questionnable news & facts (use search)
*Nudge theory associated with Richard Thaler’s 2017 Nobel Prize .

31. Key Issues Moving Forward
Theoretical Perspectives
• Be more critical of deterministic perspectives
• Don’t underestimate users & social shaping of search
Interest in Politics
• Are those least interested & involved more vulnerable?
Skills in Search and Internet
• Are those offline or least skilled at greater risk?
Digital Media Literacy or Best to Nudge All Users?
• Avoid inappropriate regulation of content: don’t panic!
• Nudge individuals – users – to reduce risks (Richard Thaler)?

32. The Report Plus
Dutton, W.H., Reisdorf, B.C., Dubois, E., and Blank, G. (2017), Search
and Politics: The Uses and Impacts of Search in Britain, France,
Germany, Italy, Poland, Spain, and the United States, Quello Center
Working Paper available on SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2960697
Dutton, W.H. (2017), ‘Fake News, Echo Chambers, and Filter
Bubbles: Underresearched and Overhyped’: https://theconversation.com/fake-
news-echo-chambers-and-filter-bubbles-underresearched-and-overhyped-76688
Dutton, W. H. (2017), ‘Bubblebusters’, NESTA. http://readie.eu/bubblebusters-
countering-fake-news-filter-bubbles-and-echo-chambers/