By: Morgan Aldridge
Updated: Aug. 8, 2016
Originally Published: Oct. 9, 2014
One of my fondest memories of my grandfather is his unwavering affection for his encyclopedia. Dinner conversations would often pause as he pulled it out to settle a debate or answer a curious question, or perhaps to identify a bird that had graced our yard. Sadly, those days of encyclopedic wisdom are gone, largely replaced by the instantaneous responses of Google. It’s remarkable that, with just a few keystrokes, we can access an entire world of information.
Search engines have undeniably revolutionized the way we access and disseminate knowledge. Yet, I harbor concerns that Google may be influencing our perspectives in ways that my grandfather’s trusty encyclopedia never could.
Recently, I conducted an experiment by entering the phrase “Does [thing] cause cancer?” into Google, varying the subject—fruit, vegetables, exercise, and even happiness. Each time, the search results included at least one article asserting a connection between these subjects and cancer. This pattern persisted across my searches; I didn’t even need to scroll down to spot them.
To illustrate, when searching for “Do vegetables cause cancer?” the top result was a Daily Mail piece titled “Eating Vegetables May Seriously Damage Your Health,” suggesting that vegetables could be linked to a cancer that claims 3,000 lives annually in Britain. Conversely, a search for “Do vegetables cure cancer?” produced another Daily Mail article claiming that a vegetable-rich diet could significantly reduce colon cancer risk. A witty site called “Kill or Cure?” showcases the Daily Mail’s perplexing tendency to categorize various items as both cancer-causing and cancer-preventative, including aspirin, babies, fried foods, gardens, and tea. Its tagline humorously invites users to decode the Daily Mail’s ongoing effort to classify inanimate objects regarding cancer risk.
The contradictory nature of these results hinges entirely on the search terms we choose. This is concerning, especially since so many of us turn to Google with questions formatted as “Does A cause B?” or “Is there a link between X and Y?” Such searches can inadvertently bolster what psychologists call confirmation bias—a tendency to seek out information that aligns with our pre-existing beliefs while dismissing conflicting evidence. Thus, our assumptions become more entrenched. When I query Google, I’m more likely to encounter sources affirming my question rather than a balanced discussion of the issue.
Moreover, Google employs a sophisticated algorithm that tailors results based on our previous searches and online behavior. This can lead to what internet activist Eli Pariser refers to as a “filter bubble,” where individuals become ensconced in environments that reinforce their viewpoints without exposing them to challenging information. For instance, two users searching for “BP” may receive starkly different results: one sees investment information for British Petroleum, while the other encounters information about the oil spill—an illustration of how search engines can limit our perspectives.
Strategies to Combat Bias
So, how can we combat this issue and ensure we are obtaining a well-rounded understanding of the topics we research? Here are a few strategies:
- When seeking answers, try searching both for the question and its opposite. For example, instead of only asking, “Is X true?” also search “Is X false?” This approach can help illuminate different sides of the issue. If I had only searched “Do vegetables cause cancer?” I might have left with my fears confirmed. By also looking for “Do vegetables cure cancer?” I discovered that evidence exists on both sides, with a greater number of reputable sources supporting the health benefits of vegetables.
- Look beyond the initial results on your search page, paying close attention to the sources. A search for “Does X cause cancer?” is likely to yield articles arguing for that connection. If you fixate on just one article, you risk developing a skewed perspective. By examining the first twenty results and assessing the credibility of the sources, you can gain a more accurate view. Does the article reference studies? Are those studies conducted by reputable institutions? Do they support the claims made in the article, or do they present a more nuanced perspective?
- Utilize search engines that prioritize your privacy, such as DuckDuckGo. This platform not only respects your personal information but also helps mitigate the filter bubble issue. Additional precautions include regularly clearing your cookies, deleting your browsing history, and using incognito mode.
If you’re curious whether Google may be influencing your views, a straightforward way to explore this is to search “Does Google bias your views?”
For more insights into topics related to home insemination, you can check out this article. It provides valuable information about navigating your fertility journey, and for those interested in organic options, consider visiting this site, which is an authority on organic cotton products. Additionally, for reliable information regarding pregnancy, the CDC offers an excellent resource that can be found here.
In summary, while Google has transformed our access to information, we must be mindful of its potential to reinforce our biases. By employing a few simple strategies, we can navigate the digital landscape more effectively, ensuring a broader and more balanced understanding of the issues that matter to us.