The purpose of this report is to analyse the role of digital platforms in contemporary media environments, including public perception of the benefits and problems they bring, especially when it comes to news and information about politics.
Overall, we find evidence for what we call ‘platform ambivalence’. This refers to the fact that many people use platforms for news and information about politics, while also remaining sceptical of the information they see there, and concerned about misinformation, bias, privacy, freedom of expression, and tech power. At the same time, people also appreciate the wider societal and personal benefits, such as easy access to information and staying connected with friends and family.
The report focuses on five platform types: (i) social media, e.g. Facebook, X (formerly Twitter), Instagram, and TikTok; (ii) search engines, e.g. Google, Bing, and Yahoo!; (iii) video networks, e.g. YouTube, Vimeo, and Dailymotion; (iv) messaging apps, e.g. WhatsApp, WeChat, and Facebook Messenger; and (v) generative AI chatbots, e.g. ChatGPT, Google Gemini, and Perplexity.
Based on survey data from eight countries, we find the following, grouped into four categories.
Findings relating to the use of platforms for news and information about politics:
Across eight countries, search engines are the most widely used platform for news (45%), followed by social media (41%) and video networks (30%). Messaging apps (15%) and generative AI (7%) are not widely used for this purpose. Online news websites and apps (59%) and TV (57%) are still more widely used than any individual platform type.
The use of news outlets and the use of digital platforms to get news and information are highly intertwined, not an either/or. Most respondents – between 52% and 82% depending on the country – report getting their political news and information from platforms and online/offline news outlets, in part because platforms host content from news outlets. Only a small minority of 10% or less rely exclusively on platforms or, more commonly, only on news outlets.
People who use platforms for news and information about politics are more likely to also use online news from broadcast and print brands. For example, among those who do not use social media for news and information about politics, 22% use a newspaper website – this rises to 39% among those that do use social media.
There are important differences between those who use platforms for news and information about politics and those who do not. Younger people, men, those with higher interest in politics, and those more comfortable with technology are all more likely to use platforms for this purpose. Differences by left/right political ideology are small.
Findings relating to the relationship between platforms, politics, and democracy:
Most people are sceptical of digital platforms as a source of news and information about politics. Just over one third trust video networks (37%), and just under one third trust messaging apps (31%). Social media is trusted by 30% and generative AI by 27%. Search engines are an outlier, trusted by a slight majority (55%).
Platforms tend to be more trusted as a source of political news and information by younger people and, to a lesser extent, men and those on the political right. These patterns can vary by country. For example, search engines are more trusted by those on the left in Germany, Brazil, and the USA.
Asked about a range of functionalities related to the public sphere, averaging across eight countries, clear majorities think that platforms have made it easier to connect with friends and family (66%), find the information they need (63%), and connect with likeminded people (59%).
Clearly illustrating the ‘platform ambivalence’ described above, there is also widespread recognition of possible problems – more than half think that platforms have made it easier for people to say things they wouldn’t say in person (69%), spread misinformation (69%), harass or threaten others (66%), or spread extreme viewpoints (64%).
Less than half typically think that platforms are systematically biased towards certain political views – but many people are uncertain. Perceptions of bias can be much stronger among certain political groups, with those on the right in the USA (69%) and on the left in Argentina (71%) much more likely to think that social media is systematically biased.
Asked about what, on balance, brings people together rather than drives them apart, we see large differences across platforms, and between platforms and other actors in society. Messaging apps (+19) and search engines (+12) are platforms that, people think, on balance, bring us together. In contrast, on balance, respondents think that social media divides us (-13). Comparing platforms with other actors in society, many more people think that journalists (-29), the news media (-27), and, especially, politicians (-55) divide us than say the same about any of the platforms we asked about.
Findings relating to platform policy and governance:
On average across eight countries, more than one third of respondents feel that areas such as misinformation (39%), generative AI misuse (38%), and tech companies’ handling of personal data (36%) are getting too little attention from policymakers. Those in Brazil are more likely to think this, whereas in Japan people are more likely to say the amount of attention these issues get is about right.
A majority in each country believe that platforms should take responsibility for showing false or misleading information posted by their users, with especially high support in South Korea (77% for social media and 79% for video networks) and Japan (73% for both social media and video networks), and a slightly smaller majority in the USA (65%) saying the same for social media platforms.
Generally, in line with previous research by the Knight Foundation in the USA, there is much greater public appetite for platforms taking responsibility for their products and services than there is for government action. Generative AI is the main exception to this – for this platform, only 48% believe platforms should hold primary responsibility, while 39% think national governments should have a greater role.
Views are split on whether platforms should only allow strong privacy settings versus letting users choose their own settings, with little variation by platform.
Findings relating to the public perception of platforms more generally:
Despite the generally low trust and widespread concern over various issues related to politics, large numbers of respondents judge that platforms have a net positive impact both for them personally and for society as a whole. This is especially true for search engines, and, to a lesser extent, video networks. People in Germany, the UK, the USA, and South Korea think that social media has a net negative effect on society (while often thinking it has a net positive effect on them personally).
While people use digital platforms, they are also concerned about problems associated with them, with strong majorities expressing concern over various online issues. The spread of misinformation online tops the list, with 87% expressing concern, followed closely by the use of generative AI to create fake content (84%). Concerns about personal data usage by major tech companies also remain high at 80%. By contrast, issues around freedom of expression see slightly lower levels of concern.