Autocomplete is a popular search feature that predicts queries based on user input and guides users to a set of potentially relevant suggestions. In this study, we examine what YouTube autocompletes suggest to users seeking information about race on the platform. Specifically, we perform an algorithm output audit of autocomplete suggestions for input queries about four racial groups and examine the stereotypes they embody. Using critical discourse analysis, we identify five major sociocultural contexts in which racial information appears – Appearance, Ability, Culture, Social Equity, and Manner. We found that the participatory nature of YouTube produces a multifaceted representation of race-related content in its search outputs, characterized by enduring historical biases, aggregated discrimination, and interracial tensions, while simultaneously depicting minority resistance and aspirations of a post-racial society. We call for innovations in content moderation policy design and enforcement to address existing racial harms in YouTube search outputs.
Al-AbbasLHaiderASHusseinRF (2020) Google autocomplete search algorithms and the Arabs’ perspectives on gender: a case study of Google Egypt. GEMA Online® Journal of Language Studies20(4): 95–112.
2.
BakerPPottsA (2013) “Why do White people have thin lips?” Google and the perpetuation of stereotypes via auto-complete search forms. Critical Discourse Studies10(2): 187–204.
3.
BergCR (2002) Latino Images in Film: Stereotypes, Subversion, and Resistance. Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.
4.
BiernatMManisM (1994) Shifting standards and stereotype-based judgments. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology66(1): 5.
5.
BishopS (2019) Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society21(11–12): 2589–2606.
6.
Boxman-ShabtaiL (2019) The practice of parodying: YouTube as a hybrid field of cultural production. Media, Culture & Society41(1): 3–20.
7.
Boxman-ShabtaiLShifmanL (2015) When ethnic humor goes digital. New Media & Society17(4): 520–539.
8.
BrownKM (2009) Foul Bodies: Cleanliness in Early America. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
9.
CadwalladrC (2016) Google, democracy and the truth about internet search. The Guardian4(12): 2016.
10.
ChenCH (1996) Feminization of Asian (American) men in the us mass media: an analysis of The Ballad of Little Jo. Journal of Communication Inquiry20(2): 57–71.
11.
CovingtonJ (2010) Crime and Racial Constructions: Cultural Misinformation about African Americans in Media and Academia. Lanham, MD: Lexington Books.
12.
EloSKyngäsH (2008) The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing62(1): 107–115.
13.
FaircloughN (1993) Critical discourse analysis and the marketization of public discourse: the universities. Discourse & Society4(2): 133–168.
14.
FaircloughN (1995) Critical discourse analysis: the critical study of language. Harlow: Longman.
15.
FelsonRB (1981) Self-and reflected appraisal among football players: a test of the median hypothesis. Social Psychology Quarterly44: 116–126.
16.
GainesLT (2022) “This ain’t just a rap song”: 2pac, sociopolitical realities, and hip hop nation language. Journal of Hip Hop Studies9(1): 7.
17.
GilensM (1996) Race and poverty in America: public misperceptions and the American news media. Public Opinion Quarterly60(4): 515–541.
18.
GoodmanSTafiVCoyleA (2023) Alternative “lives matter” formulations in online discussions about Black Lives Matter: use, support and resistance. Discourse & Society34(3): 291–316.
19.
GrahamR (2022) Investigating Google’s Search Engine: Ethics, Algorithms, and the Machines Built to Read Us. London: Bloomsbury Academic.
20.
GrahamR (2023) The ethical dimensions of Google autocomplete. Big Data & Society10(1): 20539517231156518.
21.
HunterML (2011) Buying racial capital: skin-bleaching and cosmetic surgery in a globalized world. The Journal of Pan African Studies4(4): 142–164.
22.
HurwitzJPeffleyM (1997) Public perceptions of race and crime: the role of racial stereotypes. American Journal of Political Science41: 375–401.
23.
JhaverSBirmanIGilbertE, et al. (2019) Human-machine collaboration for content regulation: the case of Reddit automoderator. ACM Transactions on Computer-Human Interaction (TOCHI)26(5): 1–35.
24.
KarapapaSBorghiM (2015) Search engine liability for autocomplete suggestions: personality, privacy and the power of the algorithm. International Journal of Law and Information Technology23(3): 261–289.
25.
KayMMatuszekCMunsonSA (2015) Unequal representation and gender stereotypes in image search results for occupations. In: Proceedings of the 33rd annual ACM conference on human factors in computing systems, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 18–23 April, pp. 3819–3828. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
26.
KhanMLMalikA (2022) Researching YouTube: methods, tools, and analytics. In: SloanLQuan-HaaseA (eds) The SAGE Handbook of Social Media Research Methods, pp. 651–663. New York: Sage.
27.
KirkHRJunYVolpinF, et al. (2021) Bias out-of-the-box: an empirical analysis of intersectional occupational biases in popular generative language models. Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems34: 2611–2624.
28.
LeeSJWongN-WAAlvarezAN (2008) The model minority and the perpetual foreigner: stereotypes of Asian Americans. In: TewariNAlvarezAN (eds) Asian American Psychology. New York: Psychology Press, pp. 119–134.
29.
LeidingerARogersR (2023) Which stereotypes are moderated and under-moderated in search engine autocompletion? In: Proceedings of the 2023 ACM conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, Chicago, IL, 12–15 June, pp. 1049–1061. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
LevyB (2009) Stereotype embodiment: a psychosocial approach to aging. Current Directions in Psychological Science18(6): 332–336.
32.
LinCGaoYTaN, et al. (2023) Trapped in the search box: an examination of algorithmic bias in search engine autocomplete predictions. Telematics and Informatics85: 102068.
33.
LintnerT (2004) The savage and the slave: critical race theory, racial stereotyping, and the teaching of American history. Journal of Social Studies Research28(1): 27.
34.
MaykovichMK (1972) Stereotypes and racial images-White, Black and Yellow. Human Relations25(2): 101–120.
35.
MillerLS (1995) The origins of the presumption of Black stupidity. The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education9: 78–82.
36.
NelsonCTiendaM (2014) The structuring of Hispanic ethnicity: historical and contemporary perspectives. In: RomeroM (ed.) Challenging fronteras. London: Routledge, pp. 7–30.
37.
NobleSU (2018) Algorithms of Oppression. New York: New York University Press.
PascoeP (1991) Race, gender, and intercultural relations: the case of interracial marriage. Frontiers: A Journal of Women Studies12(1): 5–18.
40.
Pérez HuberLSolorzanoDG (2015) Visualizing everyday racism: critical race theory, visual microaggressions, and the historical image of Mexican banditry. Qualitative Inquiry21(3): 223–238.
41.
RaiA (2020) Explainable AI: from Black box to glass box. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science48: 137–141.
42.
RakićTSteffensMCMummendeyA (2011) Blinded by the accent! The minor role of looks in ethnic categorization. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology100(1): 16.
43.
ReynoldsCHallinanB (2024) User-generated accountability: public participation in algorithmic governance on YouTube. New Media & Society26(9): 5107–5129.
44.
RibeiroMHOttoniRWestR, et al. (2020) Auditing radicalization pathways on YouTube. In: Proceedings of the 2020 conference on fairness, accountability, and transparency, Barcelona, 27–30 January, pp. 131–141. New York: Association for Computing Machinery.
45.
RobertsST (2019) Behind the Screen: Content Moderation in the Age of Social Media. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
46.
RogersRA (2006) From cultural exchange to transculturation: a review and reconceptualization of cultural appropriation. Communication Theory16(4): 474–503.
47.
RogersRA (2023) Algorithmic probing: prompting offensive Google results and their moderation. Big Data & Society10(1): 20539517231176228.
48.
RoySAyalonL (2020) Age and gender stereotypes reflected in Google’s “autocomplete” function: the portrayal and possible spread of societal stereotypes. The Gerontologist60(6): 1020–1028.
49.
SandvigCHamiltonKKarahaliosK, et al. (2014) Auditing algorithms: research methods for detecting discrimination on internet platforms. Data and Discrimination: Converting Critical Concerns into Productive Inquiry22(2014): 4349–4357.
50.
SchutzCE (1989) The sociability of ethnic jokes. Humor2: 165–177.
SongM (2004) Introduction: who’s at the bottom? examining claims about racial hierarchy. Ethnic and Racial Studies27(6): 859–877.
54.
SquiresC (2014) The Post-racial Mystique: Media and Race in the Twenty-first Century. Vol. 25. New York: NYU Press.
55.
StevensWE (2021) Blackfishing on Instagram: influencing and the commodification of Black urban aesthetics. Social Media+ Society7(3): 20563051211038236.
TryttenDALoweAWWaldenSE (2012) “Asians are good at math. what an awful stereotype”: the model minority stereotype’s impact on Asian American engineering students. Journal of Engineering Education101(3): 439–468.
58.
WaltersAAmmariTGarimellaK, et al. (2024) Online knowledge production in polarized political memes: the case of critical race theory. New Media & Society. Epub ahead of print 12 June. DOI:10.1177/14614448241252591.
59.
WangPMiXLiaoX, et al. (2018) Game of missuggestions: semantic analysis of search-autocomplete manipulations. In: Network and Distributed Systems Security (NDSS) symposium, San Diego, CA, 18–21 February.
WotanisLMcMillanL (2014) Performing gender on YouTube: how Jenna Marbles negotiates a hostile online environment. Feminist Media Studies14(6): 912–928.
62.
WuS (2023) A study on the ABG, a racialized, gendered social label. Asian American Research Journal3.
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
