Citizen Trust in 2021 How restoring public confidence will be key to accelerating the recovery - Kantar Public
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
Citizen Trust in 2021 How restoring public confidence will be key to accelerating the recovery
Webinar: Trust in the news How to address the challenges of misinformation and strengthen public resilience to the risks 23 March 2021
Welcome
Chair
Ms Grace Lown
Head of Public Affairs,
Kantar Public
3
Welcome to our speakers
Mr Tim Nguyen Ms Sophia Schmid Mr Julien Zalc
Head Of Unit High Impact Events Consultant, Kantar Public Consultant, Director of the Centre
Preparedness, Infodemic Manager Germany Kantar sur le Futur de l’Europe
at World Health Organization
4
AGENDA
1 Use and trust in the media
Fighting disinformation and fake news:
2 a case study from Germany
Responding to “infodemics”:
3 perspective from the WHO
4 Questions
5
1 Use and trust in the media
Media use in the EU
In the last decade, use of the Internet and online social networks has increased EU
and traditional media decreased
QD3 Could you tell me to what extent you…?
(% - EU - AT LEAST ONCE A WEEK)
98 97 97 97
100% 96 96
95 94 94 WATCH TV ON A TV SET +
VIA THE INTERNET
97 97 97
90% 95 94 95 94 WATCH TELEVISION ON A TV SET
93 92 90
79 78 80
80% 76 77 76 76 77 USE THE INTERNET
74 75
73
71 71 LISTEN TO THE RADIO
70% 73 75 75 74
70 72 73
69 60 59 USE ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKS
65 65
60% 63 64 63 64
61
58 READ THE WRITTEN PRESS
50% 56 55
54
50
47
40% 44
42 32
29 WATCH TELEVISION
30% 33 35 27
23 VIA THE INTERNET
20 21
17 18
20% 16
10%
0%
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019 7
The use of the social media: by country
Large variations between countries EU
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019 8
Media ranks behind other institutions in levels of public trust
EU
40%
trust the
media
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB93: Summer 2020 9
Large variations between countries, with a North-South divide
EU
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB93: Summer 2020 10Trust: social media vs. traditional media
Radio (57%) and TV (49%) continue as the most trusted source, while the Internet EU
(32%) and onlineQA6a
social networks (20%) score lower
I would like to ask you a question about how much trust you have in certain media and institutions. For each
of the following media and institutions, please tell me if you tend to trust it or tend not to trust it.
(% - EU - TEND TO TRUST)
70%
59 59 59
60% 58 57 57 58 57
54 54 55 RADIO
50 51 50
48 49
50% 53 TELEVISION
49 50 50 THE WRITTEN PRESS
48 48 47 47
46 46
40% 42 43 43 43
42 40 41
37 37 36 36 THE INTERNET
30% 35 35 34 35 34
32 32
21 20 21 20 20
19
20% ONLINE SOCIAL NETWORKS
10%
0%
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019 11Written press and the Internet: trust and use
As the Internet use rose to 80% of the population in 2019, the level of trust decreased. EU
The opposite can be seen for the written press
78% 80%
75% 77%
72% 73%
73% 71% 69% 70%
71%
63% 64% 65% 65% 56% 55%
Written press-Use
63% 61% 60%
42% 43% 43% 43% Written press-Trust
40% 41%
46% 47% 47% 46%
The Internet-Use
35% 37% 35% 36% 35% 36%
34% 34% 32% 32%
The Internet-Trust
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019
12Trust in the Internet and online social networks
EU
A generational gap : young respondents are more likely Higher levels of trust among longer educated population
to trust the Internet and online social networks and students
% by age % by education
47%
45%
41%
34% 33% 34%
31% 31%
27%
21% 22%
20%
17% 18%
12% 11%
15-24 25-39 40-54 55+ 15- 16-19 20+ Still studying
The Internet The online social networks The Internet The online social networks
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019 13Public opinion in the EU: fake news and disinformation
Awareness about the risks related to fake news is rising across the EU EU
% of citizens who
% of citizens who think is % of citizens who think is
think they can identify
a problem for democracy a problem in their country
false information
79% (+3) 74% (+3)
58% (=)
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019 – evolution since Standard Eurobarometer EB90: Autumn 2018 14Media literacy: differing levels across Europe
More than a third of respondents (36%) do not find it easy to identify fake news EU
Source: Standard Eurobarometer EB92: Autumn 2019 15Who do the public look to for reliable information about
the vaccine?
% of citizens who trust
Health authorities Family’s doctor Government Traditional media Social media No reliable
in their country source of information on
this topic
41% 39% 25% 19% 8% 15%
26% 24%
% of citizens who trust: 5%
ꟷ Doctors who speak in the media (24%)
5%
ꟷ My pharmacist (14%)
ꟷ People around me (9%)
Source: Kantar-Vaccination International Survey, fieldwork: 13-27 January 2021,7133 interviews in 7 countries. 162 Combating disinformation on social media Fighting disinformation and fake news: a case study from Germany Kantar Public Germany
Actions taken by major social media platforms against disinformation
STEP 1: Defining and detecting disinformation
Community External Machine User
guidelines evaluators / learning reports
experts
18Actions taken by major social media platforms against disinformation
STEP 2: Providing more information
Providing
Partnering Providing Media
authoritative Flagging /
with fact additional literacy
media labeling
checkers context programmes
content
19Actions taken by major social media platforms against disinformation
STEP 3: Deleting and blocking
Restricting
Restriction Regulation
Deleting Blocking visibility
of of political
content accounts through
monetisation adverstising
algorithms
20Case study: YouTube’s recommendation algorithms and disinformation
HYPOTHESIS: Methodology
Does YouTube’s
recommendation 1. Automated recording of over 33,000 recommendations
algorithm promote on COVID-19, climate change and refugees
content containing
2. Quantitative coding of 210 videos
disinformation?
3. Qualitative analysis of 15 disinformative videos
21YouTube’s recommendation algorithm does not amplify disinformation
Amount of videos containing disinformation
All recorded videos 6%
Videos about refugees 8%
Starting point: videos
containing disinformation Videos about climate change 15%
33%
Videos about COVID-19 14%
22Despite YouTube’s statements, ads still appear before disinformative videos
Monetisation of videos
Videos containing disinformation 40% 7% 55%
Neutral videos 35% 3% 63%
YouTube ads Own advertising No advertising
23Disinformation comes in many
shapes and sizes
ꟷ Different formats, target
groups, styles, quality,
topics, reach
ꟷ Presentation
as “alternative“
journalism or science
24Conclusion: Disinformation can be hard to define and detect, but there are
ways to limit it
ꟷ Transparency on algorithms
and further research
ꟷ Restricting advertising in front
of videos with disinformation
Social Government / ꟷ More high quality trustworthy
Citizens
networks regulation news sources and media literacy
ꟷ Laws and regulations
253 Approaching the challenges of the “infodemic”, disinformation and fake news about COVID-19 World Health Organization (WHO)
27
LISTEN TO CONCERNS
Questions on COVID-19 Top rising topics
Quantifying (12 – 18 Nov 2020)
Top key words
(excluding ‘COVID-19’, ‘coronavirus’ and ‘virus’)
(12 – 18 Nov 2020)
Based on % change of conversation volume from the previous week
information
through social
listening
WHO uses a digital
listening approach which
analyses and quantifies
information associated
with COVID-19. For
example, top keywords
and topics are tracked in
order to identify trends
and help manage the
infodemic.
28PILOT with 20 countries and 4 languages:
Enable health information professionals to
respond earlier to the infodemic, with a real-
time analysis of narratives of the general
public.
Building world-leading information infrastructure
to serve countries to understand attitudes of the
general public. Moving from surveys, to
datapools and AI analytics that are real-time,
flexible and locally adaptive.
See whoinfodemic.citibeats.com
29Questions
An infodemic is accompanying
”
the pandemic
• An infodemic is an overabundance of information –
good or bad – that makes it difficult for people to
make decisions for their health
• Misinformation1, disinformation2 and fake news
can cause real harm to health, public trust, social
cohesion and emergency response
We’re not just fighting an
epidemic; we’re fighting an
infodemic. Fake news spreads
faster and more easily than this
virus, and is just as dangerous.
1 inaccurate information Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus
2 false or inaccurate information intended to mislead Director-General, World Health Organization
31How people receive, process and act on information varies
Illustration: Toby Morris, The Spinoff
Understanding how information originates, evolves and spreads on different
platforms and channels is key to managing the infodemic
32Infodemiology: the science behind infodemic management
Infodemic management is an evolving area of research and practice
AREAS TO FURTHER EXPLORE
• How do overwhelming amounts of information affect
behaviour in emergencies and what interventions are
effective in addressing it?
• How does online behaviour affect offline action?
• How does the infodemic affect cognition and influence
seeking of health services?
• How does the role of policy interventions successfully
address and mitigate health misinformation?
• How does the infodemic affect closed networks and
vulnerable populations?
33Citizen Trust in 2021 series
Catch up on the previous webinars in our series
Trust in public health policies
(4th February 2021)
How to overcome COVID-19 vaccine
hesitancy and address citizen expectations
Trust in the economic recovery
(4th March 2021)
How to engage citizens with government recovery plans
34Thank you for joining us
You can also read
