![\"woman](\"https:\/\/www.online-tech-tips.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/shocked.jpeg\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n\n\n\n- \n
- Controversies<\/strong>: Anything considered to be divisive, including the Covid-19 vaccine, critical race theory, and the 2020 election.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Conspiracies<\/strong>: Theories that claim an event or set of circumstances result from secret plots conducted by powerful individuals or groups. For example, the conspiracy theory that the moon landing was a hoax.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Dangerous intent<\/strong>: Anything that leads to a dangerous situation, such as making pressure-cooker bombs or how to print a 3D gun.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
We then analyzed each of the results to categorize them into four major categories. Those categories are:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- Misinformation or sensationalized information:<\/strong> Untrue information, misinformation, or skewed data presented as fact to garner interest.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Pro-conspiracy<\/strong>: Support of a conspiracy theory or introducing a new conspiracy theory.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Uncritical:<\/strong> Willfully neutral. Not offering support to a potentially alarming idea, but not speaking against it, either. <\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Harmful<\/strong>: Actively guiding readers through dangerous situations, such as suicide.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
We analyzed 2,640 results from four search engines \u2014 Google, Yahoo, Bing, and DuckDuckGo \u2014 to discover which surfaced the most concerning information. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Google Supplied the Fewest Alarming Results and DuckDuckGo Supplied the Most<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
This study found a clear difference between the four major search engines. Especially how they handle dangerous or alarming search results. We consider dangerous results as those that have dangerous intent, promote misinformation, or drive conspiracy theories. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Only 3% of Google\u2019s search results were dangerous \u2014 the fewest of these four search engines, by far. Next was Yahoo, with 1 in 4 results leading to negative or dangerous resources. DuckDuckGo and Bing were most likely to supply dangerous results. Nearly a third of both Bing and DuckDuckGo\u2019s results were negative or alarming. This makes sense since DuckDuckGo pulls a lot of its results<\/a> from Bing\u2019s index. <\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"](\"https:\/\/www.online-tech-tips.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/search-engines-with-alarming-results.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nExposure to dangerous information is nine times more likely on DuckDuckGo and Bing than on Google. Yahoo users were seven times more likely than Google users to come across dangerous results. These results showcase how likely one is to encounter dangerous information on the internet. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Search Engines with the Most Sensationalized Results<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Next, we analyzed search results for controversial or sensationalized topics. These included COVID-19, climate change, and President Biden\u2019s mental health. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
When searching \u201cBiden\u2019s mental health\u201d on DuckDuckGo, a top result was \u201cFLASHBACK: Brain Surgeon Told Biden He Had Less Than 50% Chance of \u2018Being Completely Normal\u2019.\u201d The headline suggests that Biden has a health issue, but the content refers to surgery for two cranial aneurysms in the late 1980s. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
In fact, when it comes to controversial topics:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- 27% of DuckDuckGo results<\/strong> were classified as misinformation or sensationalism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- 25% of Bing results<\/strong> were classified as misinformation or sensationalism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- 18% of Yahoo results<\/strong> were classified as misinformation or sensationalism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- 2% of Google results<\/strong> were classified as misinformation or sensationalism.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
\u201cClimate change is a hoax\u201d returned the most sensationalized results for DuckDuckGo, Bing, and Yahoo. Google only returned two sensationalized results of the 150 we evaluated for this category.<\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"search](\"https:\/\/www.online-tech-tips.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/topics-with-alarming-results.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\n\u201cRed Pill\u201d was also popular in search results. But, every search engine except for Google was uncritical of it. The term itself is controversial, stemming from a famous Matrix scene. When someone takes the \u201cred pill,\u201d they\u2019re willing to learn a potentially unsettling or life-changing truth. Today, the term is often used<\/a> by those who lean right, such as Donald Trump and Alex Jones supporters. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Many results offered thinly-veiled misogynistic or otherwise harmful messages. Google returns nothing pro-Red Pill or sympathetic to the term\u2019s darker message in the first 30 results. In fact, the first result on Google is an article called \u201cSwallowing the Red Pill: a journey to the heart of modern misogyny.”<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Search Engines That Provide Information With Dangerous Intent<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
To study results with dangerous intent, we focused on queries around guns, bombs, drugs, and suicide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Compared to Google users, DuckDuckGo and Bing users are four times more likely to come across results with dangerous intent. Yahoo users are 3.6 times more likely than Google users. With that said, all search platforms returned helpful results for dangerous queries. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Three major topics returned the most dangerous results. Across all four search engines, the following terms resulted in the most hazardous information:<\/p>\n\n\n\n
- \n
- How to print a 3D gun.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- How to make meth.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Methods of suicide.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n
On Google, Bing, and Yahoo, \u201cHow to print a 3D gun\u201d returned more results with dangerous intent. On DuckDuckGo, \u201cHow to make meth\u201d provided more dangerous results. <\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"search](\"https:\/\/www.online-tech-tips.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/search-engines-with-dangerous-results.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nAll four platforms also returned helpful results regarding suicide. But it\u2019s interesting to note the disparity between Google, Bing, and Yahoo vs. DuckDuckGo.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
When searching for \u201ceasiest way to commit suicide\u201d and \u201cleast painful way to commit suicide,\u201d Google, Bing, and Yahoo have large helpful messages alongside the number for the National Suicide Prevention Lifeline. It is meant to grab a user\u2019s attention before they open a search result. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
On DuckDuckGo, \u201chow to commit suicide\u201d prompts suicide prevention resources to display above the search results. But, these resources do not appear when searching for \u201ceasiest or least painful methods of suicide.\u201d In fact, the first result for the \u201ceasiest\u201d query even suggests sleeping pills in the meta description, though the post itself includes information to deter suicide.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
As this study has shown, search results on DuckDuckGo appear to be the least filtered or screened.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The Most Conspiracy-Friendly Search Engines<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Search engines are not equal in what kind of conspiracy content makes it through. Most Americans believe in at least one conspiracy<\/a>. But as the internet has made connecting with others more accessible than before, conspiracies spread faster than ever.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
DuckDuckGo is the most conspiracy-friendly search engine. Along with Bing and Yahoo, these platforms allowed pro-conspiracy sources within the first three pages of results. It is important to note that reputable sources and news stories outnumbered pro-conspiracy sites within the first three pages. <\/p>\n\n\n
\n![\"queries](\"https:\/\/www.online-tech-tips.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/04\/queries-with-dangerous-results.png\")
<\/a><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n\n\nOn DuckDuckGo, Bing, and Yahoo, the most popular conspiracies that returned pro-conspiracy resources were \u201cWas Jeffrey Epstein murdered\u201d and \u201c9\/11 inside job.\u201d DuckDuckGo and Bing also had many pro-conspiracy results that surfaced for \u201cSandy Hook hoax.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n
Overall, Yahoo\u2019s first pages were less populated by pro-conspiracy results than DuckDuckGo or Bing. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
On Google, only two significant conspiracy terms return any supporting resources: 9\/11 and the moon landing. All other conspiracy theories returned professional and scholarly resources that disprove the conspiracy theories. <\/p>\n\n\n\n
Which Websites Surface the Most?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Search engines are just one part of the information-retrieval equation. The specific websites that return for each query impact the transmission of controversies, conspiracies, and terms of dangerous intent. Because of this, we wanted to better understand the types of websites that each search platform provides its users.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
On Google, Bing, and DuckDuckGo, Wikipedia is the most-served website. On Yahoo, Medium, a blogging platform, is the most-served site. Interestingly, all four search engines serve YouTube more than any single news outlet.<\/p>\n\n\n
- 25% of Bing results<\/strong> were classified as misinformation or sensationalism.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Pro-conspiracy<\/strong>: Support of a conspiracy theory or introducing a new conspiracy theory.<\/li>\n\n\n\n
- Conspiracies<\/strong>: Theories that claim an event or set of circumstances result from secret plots conducted by powerful individuals or groups. For example, the conspiracy theory that the moon landing was a hoax.<\/li>\n\n\n\n