Job Market Paper

Curating Political Information: Who Shares What with Whom?

Draft

People share true information slanted toward their positions, which can distort others’ beliefs even without any falsehood. In four experiments, I investigate whether this slant reflects deliberate selection, which motives drive it, and how it affects receivers. Senders intentionally favor facts aligned with their own political positions even with prior knowledge, credibility concerns, exposure, and identity signaling muted. Senders value sharing facts that validate their position, and facts they expect to correct the receiver’s beliefs or to persuade the receiver toward their position. Senders share less with receivers who have different political positions. When receivers’ opinions matter through a real political donation, senders appear to select more on the facts they expect to persuade receivers toward their own position. Professional journalists exhibit similar alignment-based selection even with standard explanations for media bias, such as competition, ownership and audience demand, removed. Senders’ selectivity leaves receivers with less accurate beliefs, and receivers barely notice the selection they face. This selection among true facts distorts information supply at a margin that current policy interventions, such as fact-checking, do not target.