When asked whether social media is smart or bad for democracy in their country, a median of 57% in 19 countries said it’s smart. Unusual sentiment in Singapore, where about three-quarters think social media is a smart thing for democracy in their country. However, in the Netherlands and France, about 4 in 10 people agree. And in the United States, only about a third think social media is positive for democracy — the lowest percentage among the 19 countries surveyed.
In 8 countries, those whose country’s political formula allows them to influence politics are also more likely to say that social media is a smart thing for democracy. This hole is most noticeable in Belgium, where 62% of those who feel their political formula allows them to have a voice in politics also say social media is smart for democracy in their country, compared to 44% among those who say their political formula doesn’t allow them to have much influence in politics.
Those who see the spread of fake news online as a top risk to their country are less likely to say that social media is a smart thing for democracy, for those who see the spread of fake news online as a minor risk or not a risk. Obviously, this is most noticeable in the Netherlands, where only 4 in ten (39%) of those who see the spread of fake news online as a primary risk say social media has been smart for democracy in their country, as opposed to a maximum of six in ten (57%) of those who do not see the spread of fake news online as a risk they say so. same. This trend is also evident in 8 other countries.
Opinions also vary by age. Older adults in 12 countries are less likely to say social media is smart for democracy in their country compared to their younger counterparts. In Japan, France, Israel, Hungary, the United Kingdom and Australia, the gap between older and younger teams has at least 20 percentage problems and reaches 41 problems in Poland, where almost nine in ten (87%) young adults say social media has been smart for democracy in the country and only 46% of adults over 50 say the same.
Audiences surveyed believe that the Internet and social media have effects on societies. Of the six issues evaluated, few tend to say they don’t see a replacement due to increased connectivity; Instead, they see things become definitively and negatively, and at the same time. Same time.
An average of 84% say technological connectivity has made other people easier to manipulate with false data and rumors, the maximum of the six issues assessed. Despite this, the average of 73% say other people are more informed about existing events in countries and events in their own country. In fact, in most countries, those who have made it easier to manipulate other people through erroneous data and rumors are also more likely to think that social media has made other people more informed.
When it comes to politics, the web and social media are sometimes perceived as disruptive, with an average of 65% saying other people are now more divided on their political views. This is possibly partly due to the sentiment, shared by an average of 44% across the 19 countries, that access to the web and social media has led others to be less civilized in the way they communicate about politics. Despite this, more people (a median of 45%) still say that connectivity has made other people more tolerant of other people of other ethnic groups, religions and races than saying that it has made other people less tolerant (22%) or that it had no effect (29%).
The effects reported above imply that an average of 70% in the 19 countries surveyed that the spread of false data online is a major risk to their country. In places like Canada, Germany, and Malaysia, more people point to this as a risk than saying the same thing about any of the other issues mentioned.
This sense of risk is related to the widespread confidence that other people today are easier to manipulate with false data and rumors thanks to the web and social networks. About a part or more in each country studied percentage this opinion. And in the Netherlands, Australia and the UK, about nine out of ten other people are more manipulable.
In many places, other young people, who tend to be more likely to use social media (for more on its use, see Chapter 3), are also more likely to say that it makes other people less difficult to manipulate with false data and rumors. For example, in South Korea, 90% of those under 30 say social media makes it less difficult to manipulate, compared to 65% of those over 50. (Interestingly, studies targeting the United States have found that older adults are more likely to be percentage wrong than other younger people. )People who are more knowledgeable are also more likely than those who are less knowledgeable to say that social media has made other people less difficult to manipulate.
In 2018, when the Pew Research Center made a similar inquiry about whether access to mobile phones, the internet and social media had made other people less difficult to manipulate with fake news and rumors, the effects were largely similar. In this project, at least part of the idea of each country is this the case, and in many places around three-quarters or more saw it as a problem. The country can simply be manipulated through national politicians. For more information on how the two surveys compare, see “In Complex and Emerging Economies, Similar Perspectives on How Social Media Affects Democracy and Society. “
It has long been observed that data is a source of fear for Americans. In 2016, for example, after the U. S. presidential election. In the U. S. , 64% of U. S. adults are in the U. S. At the time, about a third felt they found absolutely fabricated political data online and another part said they found data that wasn’t entirely accurate. In addition, about a quarter (23%) said they shared such stories, knowingly or unknowingly.
When asked in 2019 who was causing the made-up news, Americans largely stood out between two teams of people: political leaders (57%) and activists (53%). They are less likely to blame news hounds (36%). ), foreign actors (35%) or the public (26%). A large majority of Americans that year (82%) also described themselves as “very” or “somewhat” involved in the potential impact of production. Posting news about the 2020 presidential election. People who followed political and election news more and those with more political wisdom also tended to get more involved.
Among adult U. S. Twitter users In the U. S. in 2021, in particular, erroneous data was widespread: 53% said erroneous or misleading data is a major challenge on the platform and 33% said they saw a lot of this type of content on the site.
In 2021, about a portion (48%) of Americans believe the government deserves to take steps to limit fake news, even if it meant wasting the freedom to access and publish content, up from 2018, when 39% thought the same. .
The majority in each country surveyed said access to the internet and social media has allowed others in their country to be better informed about national news. While in Malaysia, a smaller majority (56%) say the same.
Young adults tend to see that social media makes other people more informed than older adults. Older people, on the other hand, don’t necessarily see the internet and social media making other people less informed about what’s going on in their country; Conversely, they are more likely to describe those platforms as having little effect on other people’s data points. In the case of the US, for example, 71% of adults under 30 say social media has helped others. be more informed about U. S. news, compared to 60% of people over 50. Data point compared to those under 30: 19% vs. 11%, respectively.
In seven of the countries studied, other people with higher degrees of education are more likely to see social media inform the public about events in their own country than those with lower degrees.
Most in the country also agree that the web and social media tell other people more about existing events taking positions in other countries. The two questions are highly correlated (r = 0. 94), meaning that in most places where other people say social media tells other people more about domestic occasions, they also say the same thing about foreign occasions. (See front row for detailed effects for any of the questions, across country. )
In the 2018 Emerging Economies Survey, the effects of a slightly different consultation also revealed that majorities in each country, and around seven in ten or more people in top positions, said other people were better informed thanks to social media, the web and smartphones, than less.
In some countries, those who think social media has made it easier to manipulate other people through incorrect information and rumors are also more likely to think that social media has made other people more informed. Study of economies of 11 countries: In general, those most sensitive to the potential generation of benefits they can bring to the policy realm are also the most concerned about potential harm.
In the U. S. , about a portion of adults say they get data occasionally (17%) or infrequently (33%) on social media. When it comes to where Americans get data on social media, Facebook beats all other social media sites. one-third of U. S. adults (31%) say they get news from Facebook. While Twitter is only used among 3 in 10 U. S. adults. In the U. S. (27%), about a portion of its users (53%) turn to the site for normal news. a quarter of U. S. adults get news from YouTube, while smaller stocks get news from Instagram (13%), TikTok (10%) or Reddit (8%). In particular, TikTok has grown rapidly as a source of data among young Americans in recent years.
On several social networking sites surveyed, adults under the age of 30 make up the largest percentage of those who get news on the site. For example, some or more of the normal news consumers on Snapchat (67%), TikTok (52%). or Reddit (50%) are between 18 and 29 years old.
While this poll shows that 64% of Americans, the public has become more informed through social media, the effects of the Center’s research show that Americans who primarily received election and political data on social media during the 2020 election were less informed and engaged than those who primarily received their news through other strategies (such as cable TV, print media, etc. ).
Roughly partly or more in almost every country surveyed, social media has made other people more divided in their political views. The United States, South Korea and the Netherlands probably agree. such as countries where other people are most likely to report conflicts between other people who help other political parties. Although the perceived political department in the Netherlands is somewhat smaller, it also stands out: between 2021 and 2022, the proportion of those who said there were higher conflicts across 23 percentage problems, among the highest year-over-year adjustments observed in the survey.
More broadly, in each of the countries studied, other people who see a social divide among other people who are other political parties are generally more likely to see that social media leads other people to be more divided in their political views.
In several countries, young people are more likely than older people to see social media exacerbate political differences. The most informed people see social media exacerbating political divisions more than less informed people.
Similarly, in the 2018 survey of 11 emerging economies, the effects of another query indicated that around four in ten or more in each country, and the majority in most options, thought social media had divided other people more.
There is less consensus on the role social media has played in tolerance: a median of 19 countries in 45% say it has made other people of other ethnicities, religions and races more accepting of other ethnicities, religions and races, while a median of 22% say they have done so less. And 29% say it didn’t have much effect anyway.
South Korea, Singapore, Italy and Japan are the most likely to see social media make other people more tolerant. On the other hand, the Netherlands and Hungary stand out as the two countries where a plurality claims that the Internet and social networks have made them more tolerant. other people who are less tolerant of other people with racial differences or devout. Most other societies are divided, as in the case of the United States, where approximately one-third of the public belongs to each of the 3 groups.
Young people are more likely than older people in many countries to say that social media has greater tolerance. This is the case, for example, in Canada, where 54% of adults under 30 say social media has contributed. to others who are more accepting of other people from other ethnic groups, religions and races, compared to one-third of other people over 50. In some places, and in Canada, older people are more likely to see social media lead to less tolerance, while in other places, older people are less likely to see the impact of technology.
In most countries, other people who see social media leading to more divisions among other people with other political perspectives are more likely to say that social media has made other people less tolerant of those who are different from them racially and religiously than those who say social media doesn’t affect them. Political division. People who see more clashes between supporters in their society are also more likely than those who see fewer divisions to shift some of the blame to social media, describing it as making other people less accepting of differences.
The effects of a survey research in 11 countries found that other people who used smartphones and social media were more likely to interact with other people from different backgrounds, although the question is not about solving the problem, but only about interactions. Audiences in those emerging economies were also somewhat divided about their perspectives on how social media has led other people to settle more or less with those with other perspectives.
In the countries surveyed, a median of 46% said access to the web and social media has made other people less civilized when talking about politics. That’s more than the 23 percent who say it has made them more civilians, though a median of 26 percent sees little effect either way.
In the United States, the Netherlands, and Australia, most believe that the web and social media make other people less civilized. About seven-in-ten Americans say so. Singapore stands out as the only country where about a portion of them see those technologies building civility. All the other countries studied are divided.
People with a high point of schooling have a tendency to see less civility through social media compared to those with a low point of schooling.
In most places surveyed, those who think social media has made other people more politically divided, compared to those who say it has had no effect on divisions, are also more likely to say that social media has made other people more politically divided. people less civilized in the way they communicate about politics.
In complex economies, others recognize that social media is useful for drawing the attention of the public and elected officials to certain issues, for changing mindsets, and for influencing policy choices. A median of 77% across the 19 countries surveyed say social media is an effective way to raise awareness of socio-political issues. Brits are positive about social media as a way to draw the public’s attention to an issue, and around nine in ten percent this belief. The French and Belgians are the least convinced of the role of social media in raising public awareness, yet most in both countries still say they are effective in highlighting certain upheavals to the public.
Many also consider social media to be effective in changing people’s mindsets about social or political issues (average of 65%). Adults are more skeptical, and only a fraction of them consider social media to be effective in turning people’s minds into sociopolitical problems.
Opinions on social media as a way to draw elected officials’ attention to certain issues are similar. Belgians, Hungarians and French are less convinced.
Slightly less consider social media to be effective in influencing political decisions (61% on average). Israelis doubt social media as a way to influence political change: Most Israelis say social media is a useless way to influence political decisions, and partly in France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany agree. About a fifth in Poland also provided an answer.
Another consultation was held in the United States on the role of social media in building sustained social movements; About seven-in-ten Americans say social media is effective for this. Young Americans, as well as those with more education or higher incomes, are more likely than others to feel this way. Social media users and those who say social media has sometimes been smart for American democracy are also more likely to be effective in creating sustained social movements.
Age plays a role in how others in many of the 19 countries surveyed understand the role of social media in public discourse. People between the ages of 18 and 29 likely see social media as effective in raising public awareness. For example, in France, 70% of young people aged 18-29 see social media as an effective way to raise awareness. Only 48% of those over 50 feel the same, a difference of 22 percentage points.
Similarly, young adults are more likely to see social media as an effective way to replace people’s minds on problems. the media in this way. There are fewer differences between younger and older adults in the effectiveness of social media in directing the attention of elected officials and influencing policy decisions. Young adults are also more likely to be social media users and provide answers to those questions. .
Education and source of income are other demographic characteristics similar to other people’s belief in social media as a means of influencing public discourse. In 11 countries, other people with an above-average income source are more likely to be lower than those with a lower income stream. to see social media as effective in raising awareness of socio-political issues. Other more informed people are also more likely to see social media as effective in raising awareness of socio-political issues in the public consciousness in 8 countries. People with lower levels of schooling and source of income are less likely than others to provide answers to questions about the effectiveness of social media in influencing policy, changing mindsets, and drawing attention to issues.
Social media use is also similar to how other people compare those platforms as a way to influence public discourse and policy choices. in raising public awareness, and social media users are also more likely to see social media as useful for changing mindsets in 11 of the countries. 19 countries. The differences are greater in Israel in both cases. Israeli social media users are 47 things more likely than non-users to say that social media is effective in raising awareness and 38 things more likely to be effective in changing minds on sociopolitical issues. Differing opinions between social media users and non-users are less unusual when it comes to social media as an effective way to bring issues to the attention of elected officials or influence political decisions. Social media users are also more likely than non-users. to answer those questions.
Among social media users, those who are more active are more likely to see social media as an effective way to shape people’s reviews and attention. Social media is as effective in raising awareness of socio-political issues as those rarely or never published in 16 countries. For example, in Spain, 84% of social media users who continuously or occasionally consider social media to raise awareness of issues, compared to 71% of users who never or almost never post. Similarly, social media users who post the most are more likely to see social media as effective in changing mindsets in thirteen countries, influencing policy decisions in 15 countries. , and draw the attention of elected officials to problems in 12 countries.
People’s opinion of social media as a way to raise awareness or replace influence is also similar to how they understand democracy. Other people who also believe they have a say in politics. For example, in Germany, 60% of other people who say other people like them have at least a clever influence on politics also say that social media is effective in influencing political decisions. By comparison, 43% of Germans who don’t believe they have a voice in politics also believe that social media can influence political decisions.
In times of uncertainty, smart decisions require intelligent data. Please our studies with a monetary contribution.