A Search Engine, Not a “Truth Engine”
Search results depend partly on how a question is phrased. The authors argue that searches which signal a preferred answer can reinforce confirmation bias, and recommend neutral queries followed by evaluation of the sources.
THE IDEA
A Search Engine, Not a “Truth Engine”
Google is not a dispassionate partner in information seeking who diligently corrects you when you’ve taken a wrong turn. Google is out to please, trying to determine what you want—even if doing so means giving you a dubious answer but one you want to hear. Danny Sullivan, Google’s public liaison for search, admitted as much when he stated that Google is a search engine, not a “truth engine.” “One of the big issues we’re pondering is how to explain that our role is to get you authoritative, good information, but that ultimately people have to process that information themselves,” he said. “We can give you information, but we can’t tell you the truth of a thing.”13
This is exactly the case when an issue erupts that turns the internet into a raging, turbulent sea. When that happens, Google becomes especially attentive to our cues. Back in 2017, a bunch of NFL players, following Colin Kaepernick’s lead, started taking a knee during the national anthem. Then president Trump tweeted that these actions hurt NFL ratings. If you searched for “NFL ratings down,” your top results would have supported the president. However, had you searched for “NFL ratings up,” Google would have delivered opposite results—ones that pointed to increased ratings.14
In other words, Google is not neutral. From the moment you enter your search terms, you’re teaching Google what you want. Google’s algorithms are masterful in picking up your personal tells: Are you on one side of an issue or the other? Favorable or hostile? Supporter or opponent? If there’s any indication which way you’re leaning, Google’s results will nudge you more to that side. After all, it’s Google’s business model to give you what you want. “The Internet can get you to information that would back up almost any claim of fact, no matter how unfounded,” wrote University of Connecticut philosopher Michael Lynch. “It is both the world’s best fact-checker and the world’s best bias confirmer—often at the same time.”15
For now, just remember: you’re at the poker table, and you don’t want to give away your hand. If you want to understand multiple positions on a complex issue, avoid searches that broadcast your preferences, like “is X good” or “is X bad”? Choose neutral search terms. And don’t forget: Google is following your lead.
When to use it
Researching a politically charged issue where you want to understand multiple perspectives without biasing the search results.
Fact-checking a claim made in the news or on social media by using neutral search terms.
Teaching students or colleagues about algorithmic bias and the importance of critical information literacy.
Evaluating search results for personal decisions (e.g., health advice, product reviews) to avoid reinforcement of pre-existing beliefs.
FROM THEORY TO EVERYDAY LIFE
In practice
NFL Ratings Search Divergence
In 2017, searching “NFL ratings down” returned results supporting President Trump’s claim that player protests hurt ratings, while searching “NFL ratings up” returned results showing increased ratings. Google’s algorithm adapted to each query, reinforcing the user’s implied position.
Neutral vs. Loaded Searches
A reader compares the searches “is X good” and “is X bad,” then tries “X evidence” and “X research” to look beyond the initial framing. Each set of results still needs evaluation.
A MOMENT TO REFLECT
Put it to work.
How might you change your search behavior to minimize confirmation bias when investigating a controversial topic?
Think of a recent search you did. Could your choice of words have influenced the results you saw? What neutral alternatives could you have used?
Why is it problematic to rely on Google as a 'truth engine'? What steps can you take to verify information beyond the search results?
References
- Danny Sullivan statement on Google as a search engine — Danny Sullivan
- The Internet as fact-checker and bias confirmer — Michael Lynch
CONTINUE THE CONVERSATION
Source texts
- Verified How to Think Straight, Get Duped Less, and Make Better Decisions about What to Believe Online (Mike Caulfield, Sam Wineburg)