An industry poll found 27% on the side of the restrictions. The open conversation found 57%.
Most of the gap comes from how the poll worded its questions. Thinkwell measured it in about 45 minutes, and every number on this page can be checked.
- 57%of people who took a side online favored the restrictions, against 27% in the poll
- 19 of 22poll questions are worded toward the industry; where the wording is neutral, the gap closes
- 95%agreement when each reading was checked blind
- 45 minfrom setup to confirmatory results
The issue, from the start.
In 2026, Congress has been weighing legislation that would put new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how those companies can favor their own products and services. Supporters say it would increase competition. Opponents say it would cost consumers features they use every day.
An industry group commissioned a poll on the bill. It asked 1,999 respondents 22 questions about it: how concerned they would be about its consequences, whether they would support it, and what they thought would happen if it passed. Among respondents who gave an answer, 27% came down on the side of the restrictions.
We asked a different question: when people talk about this bill in public, unprompted, which side are they on? We read Reddit, Bluesky and news coverage from August 1 to October 31, 2026, matched what people said to the same 22 poll questions, and counted only clear, explicit stances. Of 10,751 people in on-topic threads, 243 took a side, across 140 threads.
What this is, and is not
- Not a voter sample. The conversation is the people who chose to speak. Every comparison here is benchmarked against the poll, never weighted to it.
- Locked first. The hypotheses and their tests were written down and locked before any result was read.
- Anonymous accounts. No one in the conversation was identity-checked. Authors are kept as keyed hashes; no comment text, usernames or handles appear here.
- Every number checkable. Each figure on this page is read from one results file and carries its key in the page source.
Step 1 of 9
57% vs 27%
the open conversation against the poll, on the side of the restrictions
57% of people who took a side online favored the restrictions. The poll found 27%.
Among the 243 people who took a clear side in public, 57% were on the side of the restrictions, most likely between 50% and 65%. The poll found 27% of its decided respondents there. The gap is far larger than chance would explain (p = 0.0002).
Show the numbers
| Source | On the side of the restrictions | 95% interval |
|---|---|---|
| The poll | 27% | not reported |
| The open conversation | 57% | 50% to 65% |
Why it matters
The poll asked everyone every question. The conversation records only what people chose to raise, so the two are different kinds of number: one is answers to a prompt, the other is unprompted stances. A gap this size says the poll is not describing the public conversation.
How it was made
Each person counts once per question they took a side on. Intervals come from resampling whole threads, so a busy thread cannot narrow them; that leaves an effective sample of about 162 people rather than 243.
You might wonder next
Step 2 of 9
95%
of 161 pairs agreed on a blind second reading
A second, blind reading agreed with the first on 95% of 161 checks
An AI judge read every comment and decided whether it affirms, denies or qualifies each poll question, or takes no stance. To check it, a second reading of 161 comment and question pairs was drawn after the first and done blind. The two agreed on 153 of 161. Every disagreement is a stance against no stance: the readings never flip affirms into denies, the one error that would bias a share.
Show the numbers
| First reading | Affirms | Denies | Qualifies | No stance |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Affirms | 19 | 0 | 0 | 3 |
| Denies | 0 | 28 | 0 | 2 |
| Qualifies | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 |
| No stance | 2 | 1 | 0 | 104 |
Why it matters
Everything after this rests on reading stances correctly. A judge that confused sides would move the headline number; one that sometimes misses a stance only makes the sample smaller.
How it was made
The judge passed a fixed set of test cases before the run. The check pairs were weighted toward the pairs the first reading called a stance, where errors would matter most. A cheaper judge was also tried and did not agree well enough to be used; it stays a comparison, never the judge of record.
You might wonder next
Step 3 of 9
7.8%
of people who took a side came from the busiest thread
The busiest thread holds 7.8% of the people, so no single crowd sets the result
The 243 people who took a side came from 140 threads. The busiest supplied 19 of them, and the top five together 22%. The study set a limit on any one thread before it ran, and this is well inside it.
Show the numbers
| Threads | People who took a side | Share |
|---|---|---|
| Thread 1 | 19 | 7.8% |
| Thread 2 | 14 | 5.8% |
| Thread 3 | 7 | 2.9% |
| Thread 4 | 7 | 2.9% |
| Thread 5 | 6 | 2.5% |
| Other 135 | 190 | 78.2% |
Why it matters
If one thread dominated, its crowd could set the answer, and a single viral post would look like public opinion.
How it was made
Threads are counted by the people in them who took a side. The tests resample whole threads rather than people, which is why the interval in step 1 is wider than a simple count would give.
You might wonder next
Step 4 of 9
3 of 3
families of questions lean further toward the restrictions than the poll
The conversation leans further toward the restrictions than the poll in all 3 families of questions
The poll's questions fall into three families: consequences of the bill, how it is framed, and whether to pass or block it. In each, the conversation sits well to the side of the restrictions compared with the poll, and each result holds after correcting for testing several at once (Benjamini-Hochberg). The two sides also argue differently: people against the restrictions argue mostly with facts, people for them mostly with policy (p below 0.0001).
Show the numbers
| Hypothesis | Conversation | 95% interval | Poll | People |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| H1 All 22 questions | 57% | 50% to 65% | 27% | 243 |
| H2 Pass or block | 78% | 66% to 90% | 33% | 54 |
| H3 Consequences | 43% | 35% to 52% | 27% | 156 |
| H4 Framing | 78% | 67% to 88% | 20% | 58 |
Why it matters
A gap in one family could be a quirk of a few questions. A gap in all three says the lean is general.
How it was made
Thread-cluster bootstrap, explicit stances only, with the hypotheses and corrections locked before results.
You might wonder next
Step 5 of 9
rho 0.07
rank agreement between the conversation and the poll, question by question
Item by item, the conversation does not rank the questions the way the poll does
If the poll and the conversation were measuring the same thing, the questions the poll finds most popular would also be the most popular online. They are not: across the 11 questions with enough people, the rank correlation is 0.07 (p = 0.42), no better than chance. This is the one locked test that did not hold.
Show the numbers
| Question | Family | Poll | Conversation | People |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| How convenient these online services are to use | Consequences | 53% | 29% | 7 |
| How well your personal data and payments are protected from fraud and scams | Consequences | 52% | 38% | 29 |
| How affordable online products and services are for you | Consequences | 49% | 67% | 6 |
| Industry innovation or government action: which comes closer to your view | Framing | 42% | 79% | 52 |
| Support or oppose Congress passing the legislation | Pass or block | 42% | 88% | 43 |
| Adopt rules like Europe's, even if it meant losing features | Pass or block | 41% | 30% | 10 |
| Making digital advertising less effective or more expensive for small businesses | Consequences | 32% | none | 0 |
| Made these services less convenient to use | Consequences | 28% | 29% | 7 |
| Features like maps and directions no longer appearing directly inside search and other apps, because companies could not combine their own services | Consequences | 27% | 0% | 2 |
| Reduced safety protections for children online | Consequences | 25% | 42% | 31 |
| Hurt small businesses that rely on these platforms | Consequences | 24% | 40% | 5 |
| Weakened security or fraud protection | Consequences | 23% | 38% | 29 |
| Having to pay separately for perks that are now bundled together, such as free shipping, streaming, and storage | Consequences | 22% | none | 0 |
| Fewer free or low-cost features than you have today | Consequences | 22% | none | 0 |
| Raised the prices you pay | Consequences | 20% | 62% | 16 |
| Making it harder to keep children and teens safe online | Consequences | 20% | 42% | 31 |
| No laws that risk disruption without clear evidence | Pass or block | 17% | 100% | 1 |
| A greater risk of scams, malware, or fraud from unverified outside apps being allowed onto smartphones | Consequences | 15% | 38% | 29 |
| Higher prices on the products and services you buy online | Consequences | 14% | 62% | 16 |
| Weaker protection for your personal data and privacy | Consequences | 14% | 41% | 75 |
| Laws should apply equally to all companies | Framing | 11% | 67% | 6 |
| Congress should focus on everyday costs, not new restrictions | Framing | 9% | 100% | 1 |
Why it matters
A shift in level with the same order would mean the poll is tilted. A different order means the poll and the conversation are answering different questions. Step 6 shows why.
How it was made
Some questions share one underlying claim, so they show the same conversation share; there are fewer independent points than rows. Questions with no stances online show the poll's ring only.
You might wonder next
Step 6 of 9
19 of 22
poll questions are worded toward the industry
19 of the poll's 22 questions are worded toward the industry, and that is where the gap is
Two blind coders read every poll question and agreed on the framing of all of them (100% agreement): 19 lean toward the industry, 3 are neutral, and none lean toward the restrictions. Every consequence question opens with "impose new restrictions"; every support question opens with "harming the people who rely on these online services". Where the poll asks neutrally, the conversation and the poll roughly agree (-7 points). Where it leads, they part by 26 points.
Show the numbers
| Wording | Questions | Average gap | 95% interval |
|---|---|---|---|
| Toward the industry | 19 | +26 points | +16 points to +36 points |
| Neutral | 3 | -7 points | -24 points to +17 points |
Read the questions, five ways
Coming soonFor every poll question we wrote a neutral version, an opposite-framed version with matching loading, and two close paraphrases. Highlighted words are the ones both coders flagged as loaded. These versions are written and coded; putting them in front of real people, at random, is the next wave.
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Higher prices on the products and services you buy onlineNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in the prices of the products and services you buy onlineOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Higher prices on the products and services you buy online because a few giant platforms face little competitionClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Higher prices for the products and services you purchase onlineSecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Having to pay more for the products and services you buy online
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Features like maps and directions no longer appearing directly inside search and other apps, because companies could not combine their own servicesNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in whether features like maps and directions appear directly inside search and other appsOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Features like maps and directions from rival companies being pushed out of search and other apps, because dominant platforms favor their own servicesClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Features such as maps and directions no longer showing up directly in search and other apps, since companies could not combine their own servicesSecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Maps, directions and similar features disappearing from directly inside search and other apps, because companies would be barred from combining their own services
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Having to pay separately for perks that are now bundled together, such as free shipping, streaming, and storageNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in how perks such as free shipping, streaming, and storage are bundled and pricedOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Being locked into bundles of perks such as shipping, streaming, and storage that tie you to one company and make rivals harder to chooseClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Paying separately for perks that are bundled together today, such as free shipping, streaming, and storageSecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Perks like free shipping, streaming, and storage, now bundled together, having to be paid for one by one
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
A greater risk of scams, malware, or fraud from unverified outside apps being allowed onto smartphonesNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in the risk of scams, malware, or fraud if outside apps are allowed onto smartphonesOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Being shut out of trusted outside apps and app stores because a few giant companies control what is allowed onto smartphonesClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
An increased risk of scams, malware, or fraud because unverified outside apps would be allowed onto smartphonesSecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
More exposure to scams, malware, or fraud as unverified outside apps are let onto smartphones
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Weaker protection for your personal data and privacyNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in the protection of your personal data and privacyOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Giant platforms gathering and combining your personal data across their own services with little accountabilityClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Less protection for your personal data and privacySecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Your personal data and privacy being protected less well
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Making it harder to keep children and teens safe onlineNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in how easy it is to keep children and teens safe onlineOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Dominant platforms putting their own interests ahead of keeping children and teens safe onlineClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Keeping children and teens safe online becoming more difficultSecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Making it tougher to protect children and teens online
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Making digital advertising less effective or more expensive for small businessesNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in how effective or how expensive digital advertising is for small businessesOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Dominant platforms making digital advertising less fair or more expensive for small businessesClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Digital advertising becoming less effective or costlier for small businessesSecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Making it harder or pricier for small businesses to advertise effectively online
As the poll asked it
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. These proposed rules could cause consumers to lose easy access to convenient features and services they currently use. Here are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Fewer free or low-cost features than you have todayNeutral rewrite
Congress is considering legislation that would place new rules on large online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can offer their own products and services online. Supporters say the rules could increase competition and consumer choice; opponents say they could change or remove some features and services consumers use today. Here are some possible effects of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Possible changes in the number of free or low-cost features compared with todayOpposite framing
Congress is considering legislation that would impose new limits on the largest online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how they can favor their own products and services over competitors’. These proposed rules could give consumers more choice and fairer prices by ending the unchecked power of a few giant companies. Here are some potential consequences of leaving these companies unchecked. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Dominant platforms using free features to shut out smaller rivals, leaving you fewer real choices than you could haveClose paraphrase
Congress is weighing legislation that would place new restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, among them limits on how companies may offer their own products and services online. Under these proposed rules, consumers could lose easy access to convenient features and services they use today. Below are some potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
Fewer free or inexpensive features than you get todaySecond paraphrase
New legislation before Congress would add restrictions on online platforms and marketplaces, including limits on how companies can present their own products and services online. These proposed rules might leave consumers without easy access to convenient features and services they currently rely on. Here are some of the potential consequences of this legislation. How concerned are you, if at all, about each?
A smaller number of free or low-cost features than are available now
As the poll asked it
Which of the following statements comes closer to your view?
Both coders: worded toward the industryNeutral rewrite
Which of the following statements comes closer to your view?
Opposite framing
Some say a handful of giant technology companies now use their market power to crowd out rivals and hurt consumers. Which of the following statements comes closer to your view?
Close paraphrase
Which of these statements is closer to what you think?
Second paraphrase
Of the following statements, which comes nearest to your own view?
As the poll asked it
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these online services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Raised the prices you payNeutral rewrite
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and give people more choices among online services; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Changed the prices you payOpposite framing
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and protect the people who rely on these online services from the power of a few giant platforms; opponents argue it could change how some of these services work. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Lowered the prices you payClose paraphrase
Supporters of this legislation say it would boost competition; opponents argue it could end up hurting the people who depend on these online services. Keeping that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Pushed up the prices you paySecond paraphrase
Backers of this legislation say it would increase competition, while opponents contend it could ultimately harm the people who rely on these online services. Given that, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Made you pay more
As the poll asked it
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these online services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Made these services less convenient to useNeutral rewrite
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and give people more choices among online services; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Changed how convenient these services are to useOpposite framing
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and protect the people who rely on these online services from the power of a few giant platforms; opponents argue it could change how some of these services work. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Made these services more convenient to useClose paraphrase
Supporters of this legislation say it would boost competition; opponents argue it could end up hurting the people who depend on these online services. Keeping that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Made these services less convenientSecond paraphrase
Backers of this legislation say it would increase competition, while opponents contend it could ultimately harm the people who rely on these online services. Given that, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Reduced how convenient these services are to use
As the poll asked it
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these online services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Weakened security or fraud protectionNeutral rewrite
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and give people more choices among online services; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Changed the level of security or fraud protectionOpposite framing
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and protect the people who rely on these online services from the power of a few giant platforms; opponents argue it could change how some of these services work. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Strengthened security or fraud protectionClose paraphrase
Supporters of this legislation say it would boost competition; opponents argue it could end up hurting the people who depend on these online services. Keeping that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Lowered security or protection against fraudSecond paraphrase
Backers of this legislation say it would increase competition, while opponents contend it could ultimately harm the people who rely on these online services. Given that, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Made security or fraud protection weaker
As the poll asked it
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these online services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Reduced safety protections for children onlineNeutral rewrite
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and give people more choices among online services; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Changed the safety protections for children onlineOpposite framing
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and protect the people who rely on these online services from the power of a few giant platforms; opponents argue it could change how some of these services work. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Improved safety protections for children onlineClose paraphrase
Supporters of this legislation say it would boost competition; opponents argue it could end up hurting the people who depend on these online services. Keeping that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Cut back safety protections for children onlineSecond paraphrase
Backers of this legislation say it would increase competition, while opponents contend it could ultimately harm the people who rely on these online services. Given that, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Lessened the protections that keep children safe online
As the poll asked it
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these online services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Both coders: worded toward the industry
Hurt small businesses that rely on these platformsNeutral rewrite
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and give people more choices among online services; opponents argue it could end up harming the people who rely on these services. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Changed how small businesses that rely on these platforms fareOpposite framing
Supporters of this legislation say it would increase competition and protect the people who rely on these online services from the power of a few giant platforms; opponents argue it could change how some of these services work. With that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Helped small businesses that rely on these platformsClose paraphrase
Supporters of this legislation say it would boost competition; opponents argue it could end up hurting the people who depend on these online services. Keeping that in mind, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Harmed small businesses that depend on these platformsSecond paraphrase
Backers of this legislation say it would increase competition, while opponents contend it could ultimately harm the people who rely on these online services. Given that, would you support or oppose this legislation if it...
Damaged the prospects of small businesses that rely on these platforms
As the poll asked it
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should focus on lowering everyday costs for families rather than passing new restrictions that could disrupt the online services people use every day.
Both coders: worded toward the industryNeutral rewrite
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should pass new restrictions on how large online platforms favor their own products and services.
Opposite framing
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should focus on stopping dominant platforms from squeezing out rivals and driving up costs for families rather than leaving those companies free to rig the online marketplace people use every day.
Close paraphrase
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Rather than passing new restrictions that could disrupt the online services people rely on every day, Congress should concentrate on lowering everyday costs for families.
Second paraphrase
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress ought to prioritize bringing down everyday costs for families instead of enacting new restrictions that might disrupt the online services people use daily.
As the poll asked it
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Laws and regulations should apply equally to all companies, rather than targeting only a handful of specific technology companies.
Both coders: worded toward the industryNeutral rewrite
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Laws and regulations should apply equally to all companies, rather than being written for specific large technology companies.
Opposite framing
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Laws and regulations should target the handful of giant technology companies that dominate the market, rather than applying the same light rules to everyone.
Close paraphrase
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Laws and regulations should be applied equally to every company, not aimed at just a handful of particular technology companies.
Second paraphrase
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Rules and regulations ought to cover all companies equally instead of singling out only a few specific technology companies.
As the poll asked it
If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
Both coders: worded neutrally
How affordable online products and services are for youNeutral rewrite
If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How affordable online products and services are for youOpposite framing
Supporters say this legislation would rein in a few giant platforms and give consumers more choice and fairer deals. If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How affordable online products and services are for youClose paraphrase
Suppose this legislation became law. What do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How affordable online products and services are for youSecond paraphrase
Thinking about what would happen if this legislation were enacted, what do you think is most likely for each of the following?
The affordability of online products and services for you
As the poll asked it
If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
Both coders: worded neutrally
How well your personal data and payments are protected from fraud and scamsNeutral rewrite
If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How well your personal data and payments are protected from fraud and scamsOpposite framing
Supporters say this legislation would rein in a few giant platforms and give consumers more choice and fairer deals. If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How well your personal data and payments are protected from fraud and scamsClose paraphrase
Suppose this legislation became law. What do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How well your personal data and payments are safeguarded against fraud and scamsSecond paraphrase
Thinking about what would happen if this legislation were enacted, what do you think is most likely for each of the following?
The level of protection your personal data and payments have from fraud and scams
As the poll asked it
If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
Both coders: worded neutrally
How convenient these online services are to useNeutral rewrite
If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How convenient these online services are to useOpposite framing
Supporters say this legislation would rein in a few giant platforms and give consumers more choice and fairer deals. If this legislation became law, what do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How convenient these online services are to useClose paraphrase
Suppose this legislation became law. What do you think would most likely happen to each of the following?
How easy these online services are to useSecond paraphrase
Thinking about what would happen if this legislation were enacted, what do you think is most likely for each of the following?
The convenience of these online services
As the poll asked it
The European Union’s Digital Markets Act, a law that regulates large technology companies, has led some of those companies to change or remove features for their users in Europe
Both coders: worded toward the industry
For example, limiting the map and business information shown directly in search results. Would you support or oppose the United States adopting similar regulations, if it meant you might lose access to features you use today?Neutral rewrite
The European Union’s Digital Markets Act is a law that regulates large technology companies. Its supporters say it is meant to increase competition and give users more choice, and some of the companies have changed or removed features for their users in Europe, for example limiting the map and business information shown directly in search results. Would you support or oppose the United States adopting similar regulations?
Opposite framing
The European Union’s Digital Markets Act, a law that regulates large technology companies, is designed to stop those companies from favoring their own products so that users in Europe can choose among more competing services, for example so rival map and business listings can appear alongside the company’s own in search results. Would you support or oppose the United States adopting similar regulations, if it meant you might gain more choices and fairer competition than you have today?
Close paraphrase
The European Union’s Digital Markets Act, which regulates large technology companies, has caused some of them to change or remove features for their European users, for instance restricting the map and business information displayed directly in search results. Would you support or oppose the United States adopting similar regulations, if you might lose access to features you use now?
Second paraphrase
Some large technology companies have changed or removed features for users in Europe because of the Digital Markets Act, the European Union law that regulates them. One example is the limited map and business information shown directly in search results. Would you support or oppose the United States adopting similar regulations if it could cost you access to features you use today?
As the poll asked it
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should not pass laws that risk disrupting the online services consumers use every day unless there is clear evidence those laws will lower prices and improve the consumer experience.
Both coders: worded toward the industryNeutral rewrite
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should pass laws that change how online services work only if there is clear evidence those laws will lower prices and improve the consumer experience, even if waiting for that evidence delays action on competition concerns.
Opposite framing
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should not leave dominant online platforms free to squeeze out competitors and harm consumers every day unless there is clear evidence that doing nothing will lower prices and improve the consumer experience.
Close paraphrase
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Unless there is clear evidence that they will lower prices and improve the consumer experience, Congress should not pass laws that risk disrupting the online services consumers rely on every day.
Second paraphrase
Please indicate whether you agree or disagree with the following statement. Congress should refrain from passing laws that could disrupt the online services consumers use daily unless clear evidence shows those laws will reduce prices and improve the consumer experience.
As the poll asked it
Knowing what you know now, do you support or oppose Congress passing this legislation?
Both coders: worded toward the industryNeutral rewrite
Overall, do you support or oppose Congress passing this legislation?
Opposite framing
Having heard how this legislation could curb the power of dominant platforms and open up competition for consumers, do you support or oppose Congress passing this legislation?
Close paraphrase
Given what you know at this point, do you support or oppose Congress passing this legislation?
Second paraphrase
With everything you now know, would you support or oppose Congress passing this legislation?
Why it matters
This is the reason the study matters. The poll's {pct(h1['null'])} is partly an answer to its own wording. Read the questions below and judge for yourself.
How it was made
Gaps are averaged over questions with enough stances in the conversation, with intervals from resampling questions. Only 3 questions are neutral, so this comparison is exploratory, not confirmatory. The lead-in also pushes answers to the ends: the strongest answer category takes 52% of decided answers on the bill questions against 35% on the poll's everyday-use questions.
You might wonder next
Step 7 of 9
52% vs 49%
strong answers in the poll and in the conversation
Strong answers are about as common online as in the poll. The side is what differs.
A poll answer records a side and a strength, such as "very concerned". Text carries both too. Each of 330 stances was coded as strong or moderate from its language, and a second AI model, coding blind, agreed on 91% of 120. Strong answers make up 52% of the poll's decided answers and 49% of the conversation's. The strength is the same; the side is not.
Show the numbers
| Measure | The poll | The conversation |
|---|---|---|
| Strong answers | 52% | 49% |
| On the side of the restrictions | 27% | 57% |
Why it matters
This rules out a simple story where online talk is just angrier. The conversation is as strong as the poll and points the other way.
How it was made
Strength is coded from the language of each stance (all caps, exclamation marks and intensifiers are much more common in strong ones) on the 18 questions that have a strength scale.
You might wonder next
Step 8 of 9
69%
of top-level comments posted in the first 15 minutes reached their thread's top quarter
69% of top-level comments posted in the first 15 minutes reached their thread's top quarter. After 3 to 12 hours, 22% did.
When to speak matters as much as what to say. Top-level comments written in the first 15 minutes after a post landed in their thread's top quarter by score 69% of the time; those written 3 to 12 hours in, 22%. Compared within the same thread, each doubling of delay costs about 23% of a comment's score, across 283 threads.
Show the numbers
| Posted after the post | Top-level comments | Reached the top quarter |
|---|---|---|
| 0 min to 15 min | 747 | 69% |
| 15 min to 1 h | 1,148 | 50% |
| 1 h to 3 h | 1,254 | 29% |
| 3 h to 12 h | 1,408 | 22% |
| 12 h to 24 h | 504 | 32% |
| 24 h to 72 h | 268 | 40% |
| After 72 h | 115 | 32% |
Why it matters
The comments that take a side tend to arrive hours in, after the window where reach is decided. Anyone who wants to be heard on an issue like this has minutes, not hours.
How it was made
Score was read once, when the data was collected, so this shows where reach ended up, not how it built. Within-thread comparison holds the topic and the crowd fixed.
You might wonder next
Step 9 of 9
45 min
from setup to confirmatory results
The study took about 45 minutes from setup to confirmatory results
A study like this usually takes a research team weeks. This one went from setup to locked, confirmatory results in about 45 minutes, on top of collecting the data earlier the same day. The compute was AI model tokens; no cloud functions ran.
| Stage | Tokens |
|---|---|
| Stance judge, first reading | 1.18M |
| Stance judge, blind second reading | 64k |
| Cross-check by a second AI model | 75k |
| News full text, web search | 384k |
| A second reading drawn too early, not used | 69k |
Why it matters
Speed changes what is worth asking. When a check like this takes an hour, it can run before a decision instead of after it.
How it was made
Token counts are the totals the session reported for each stage. Time is measured from attaching the data to the confirmatory results.
You might wonder next
The method
How the personas stay honest: real people check them, every wave.
Thinkwell's AI personas predict how people would answer a question. A smaller group of verified people answer for real. The method combines the two, so the result is sharper than the verified group alone, and its error bars hold for the sample you actually have, not only in theory for very large samples. It is a mixed-subjects design, after van Loon and Kanopka (2026).
It works under three conditions: the verified people are picked at random from the group you want to describe, which of them answer is decided at random, and the personas' predictions are fixed before the answers come in.
The rolling benefit. Every new wave of verified people re-measures how closely the personas track real people. When the personas are good, each verified person counts for more, so the same confidence costs fewer people. When the personas drift, the error bars widen on their own and the estimate stays unbiased: a wrong persona cannot quietly make the number wrong. The cost of a decision-grade answer falls as the personas improve, and drift shows up instead of hiding.
In simulation, the calibrated estimators cut sampling noise by up to 35%, with zero bias, against a plain estimate from verified people alone.
Every number can also carry how its people were verified: real ID, video, phone, email, public figure, attested, or anonymous. That labeling is Built. The conversation on this page is anonymous.
What a verified person is worth
Illustration, not a resultAt this setting, about 64 verified people give the same error bar as 100 without personas.
A teaching sketch: verified people needed for the same error bar, out of 100, using the textbook rule that a predictor correlated r with the answer removes r squared of the noise. It ignores real-world costs and is not a study result.
Measured with Thinkwell.
Thinkwell is Pulp's product for reading public conversation the way a poll reads a sample: who took a side, how strongly, on which claim, and how sure we can be. The short version of this study, for teams who make decisions on issues like this one, is on thinkwell.cloud.
How every number was made
- Sample
- Reddit, Bluesky and news headlines, August 1 to October 31, 2026. Not a voter sample.
- Identity
- Anonymous: social accounts, no identity check.
- Status
- Confirmatory for the locked hypotheses; the wording analysis is exploratory.
- Locks
- Hypotheses, tests and corrections written down before any result was read.
- Privacy
- No comment text, usernames or handles. Authors are keyed hashes.
- Not tested
- Social against news: only 6 news outlets took a stance, too few to test.
Want an issue of yours measured like this?
Tell us the question. We bring the data and the method.