Global Poll Finds Rising Fear That Social Media Is Damaging Democracy
Public opinion about social media’s impact on democracy has darkened sharply around the world, according to a new Pew Research Center survey of 37 countries, although a majority of adults worldwide still say online platforms are a positive force for democratic life. The survey, based on interviews with more than 45,000 adults conducted from Feb. 8 to May 13, 2026, finds that across the countries polled, a median of 55% say social media has been more of a good thing for democracy, while a median of 35% say it has been a bad thing. But in most countries where Pew has comparable data from 2022 or 2023, the share calling social media bad for democracy has climbed significantly. Among the 12 countries with the largest statistically significant changes, every one recorded an increase in negative views. Germany now stands at 61%, up from 37% in 2022. France has risen to 65% from 43%, the Netherlands to 70% from 54%, Sweden to 47% from 32%, Japan to 43% from 23%, and Indonesia from 24% in 2023 to 43%. Hungary and Poland have each moved by 20 points, from 22% to 42% and from 15% to 35%, respectively. Spain, the U.K., Canada and Greece also show statistically significant increases. The United States remains the most negative country surveyed: 64% of American adults say social media has been bad for democracy, while just 34% say it has been good. That negativity is unchanged since 2022, meaning other nations are now catching up with U.S. skepticism. Seven of the wealthier countries in the survey have majority-negative assessments: Australia, Canada, France, Germany, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the United States.
The pattern of opinion is closely tied to national income. In general, people in wealthier countries are much more likely to say social media harms democracy, while those in lower-income countries tend to see it as a benefit. The seven countries with majority-negative views are also among the wealthiest in the survey. But wealth is not decisive. Israel and Singapore, two high-income countries, are clear exceptions: in each, only about 22% say social media is bad for democracy, while roughly two-thirds or more say it has been good. In lower-income countries, positivity is overwhelming. In Ghana, Kenya, Nigeria, the Philippines and Thailand, roughly three-quarters or more of adults say social media has been good for democracy; in Nigeria, only 11% say it has been bad. The report also found a broad regional gradient. In Europe, opinion is fragmented: Italians, Poles and Greeks are positive, while majorities in the Netherlands, France, Germany and the U.K. are negative. Across the Asia-Pacific, most publics are positive, with seven-in-ten or more in Thailand, Singapore, the Philippines and Malaysia saying social media has been good; however, 52% of Australians and 43% in Japan and Indonesia say it has been bad. In the Middle East, Africa and Latin America, every country surveyed has at least half saying social media has been good for democracy. In Israel, 65% call it good; in Nigeria, 80%; in Kenya, 75%; in Brazil, 65%; in Mexico, 69%; and in Argentina, 56%. Chile is the only country in these regions where as many as four-in-ten—43%—describe it as bad. The overall global picture, therefore, is not a simple majority for either side; rather, it is a world split along lines of economic and political development.
Why do majorities in most countries still say social media is good for democracy, despite all the criticism? The survey suggests it is because people see tangible benefits in information and participation. A median of 77% across the 37 countries say access to the internet and social media has made people more informed about current events, and a median of 60% say it has given people the ability to have a more meaningful voice in politics. These positive judgments are almost universal: in every country surveyed, a majority says people are better informed, and in every country at least roughly half says people have gained a meaningful voice. Even in the U.S., where the overall verdict on social media is quite negative, 68% say access has made people more informed and 50% say it has given people more voice. The report notes that part of the explanation may be that social media gives people a voice at a time when many feel voiceless. But the same publics are deeply aware of the costs. A median of 79% say access has made it easier for people to be manipulated with false information and rumors, and a median of 68% say it has made people more divided in their political opinions. In all 37 countries, majorities say manipulation is now easier; in all countries, roughly half or more say division has increased. In the U.S., 87% say manipulation is easier and 81% say people are more divided. The coexistence of these views is striking: in 29 countries, at least a third of adults say all four effects—being more informed, having a voice, being easier to manipulate and being more divided—are occurring at the same time.
The survey’s longitudinal data show that negative perceptions are not static—they are intensifying, especially when it comes to political polarization. Since 2022, the share of adults saying internet and social media have made people more politically divided has increased by double digits in several countries. Poland posted the largest jump, from 50% to 79%. Germany rose from 65% to 82%, France from 52% to 69%, Japan from 47% to 64%, Spain from 66% to 80%, the U.K. from 66% to 79%, Hungary from 67% to 79%, and Malaysia from 43% to 53%. Pew notes that Hungary and Poland have been surveyed by phone since 2024 rather than face-to-face, a methodological change that may affect year-over-year comparisons. The U.S. is one of 10 countries where roughly eight-in-ten or more now say social media has made people more politically divided. In the U.S., 81% hold this view, statistically the same as the 79% recorded in 2022. The concern crosses party lines: 83% of Republicans and Republican-leaning independents say social media amplifies divisions, as do 82% of Democrats and Democratic leaners. Similar rises are visible on the false-information dimension. A median of 79% across all countries say access has made it easier to manipulate people with false information and rumors; in many wealthy countries, that share is even higher. The convergence of polarization and misinformation worries is a major reason why public trust in social media as a democratic tool has eroded so quickly.
Attitudes also diverge sharply by age, education and usage, pointing to a possible generational divide in how social media is judged. In 24 countries, adults ages 18 to 34 are significantly more likely than those 50 and older to say social media has been good for democracy. One of the largest gaps is in the U.K., where 60% of younger adults say it has been good, versus only 31% of those 50 and older. Significant age gaps also appear in India, Ghana, Thailand, Turkey, Japan, France, South Africa, Kenya, Peru, Sri Lanka, Australia, the U.S., Mexico, Germany, Colombia, Singapore, Canada, Italy, Sweden, Israel, Malaysia and Argentina. In the U.S., 44% of adults under 35 say social media has been good for democracy, compared with 28% of those 50 and older. In Japan, 61% of young adults say it has been good versus 40% of older adults; in Germany, the gap is 46% to 31%; in India, it is 74% to 50%. Interestingly, younger adults are not simply more favorable across the board; they are also more likely to see both the positive and negative consequences of social media. They are more likely than older people to say the platforms inform people and give them a voice, but they are also more likely to say it makes people easier to manipulate and more politically divided. Education follows a similarly complex pattern. In several countries, people with higher levels of education are more positive about social media’s effect on democracy, and they are more likely to perceive its benefits and its harms. Platform use is another predictor: people who use more than three of the platforms included in the survey are generally more likely than those who use fewer to say social media has been good for democracy. Older adults, those with less education and those who do not use social media are often less likely to offer an opinion on these questions at all.
The survey also identifies which platforms are at the center of this global conversation. Across the 37 countries, Facebook is the most widely used of the five platforms asked about, with a median of 69% of adults saying they use it. Instagram is the second most common at 51%, followed by TikTok at 40%. X, formerly known as Twitter, and Snapchat are each used by a median of 18%. TikTok use is especially common among young adults, and in many countries the number of platforms a person uses correlates with more positive assessments of social media’s role in democracy. These findings come at a moment when governments around the world are weighing new restrictions on social media, from age limits for children to rules on political advertising, algorithmic transparency and artificial intelligence-generated misinformation. The survey does not offer policy prescriptions, but it provides a global baseline of public sentiment. Most adults—particularly in lower-income countries and among younger generations—still see social media as a net good for democracy. But a large and growing minority, concentrated in the world’s wealthiest democracies, views it as a threat. The report is based on interviews with 45,658 adults in 37 countries conducted from Feb. 8 to May 13, 2026. The countries surveyed include Argentina, Australia, Bangladesh, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kenya, Malaysia, Mexico, the Netherlands, Nigeria, Pakistan, Peru, the Philippines, Poland, Singapore, South Africa, South Korea, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey, the United Kingdom and the West Bank and East Jerusalem. In the U.S., data are drawn from two surveys: 3,507 members of the American Trends Panel interviewed March 23-29, 2026, and 5,511 adults interviewed Jan. 30-June 18, 2026 as part of the National Public Opinion Reference Survey. The full report includes survey questions, toplines and methodology.