Post

Could social media make us less polarized instead of more? We tested 5 algorithms on 3 platforms with 10,000 people for 6 months during the 2024 election, and found that the answer is yes. 🧵

We ran an international competition to design new social media algorithms, then used a browser extension to intercept users' feeds and re-ranked them in real time. Each algorithm could re-order, add, and/or delete posts and comments on Facebook, X/Twitter, and Reddit. 2/

The result: affective polarization dropped by an average of -0.03 SD (p<0.05), a 1.5 point shift on the 100-point feeling thermometer. By comparison, US polarization has risen ~0.6 points/year, so this is like reversing roughly 2.5 years of increase. 3/

The two strongest algorithms: Uprank Bridging + Downrank Toxic, and Add News. Notably, upranking constructive content alone wasn't enough, we also needed to reduce the prominence of outrage and toxicity. But merely adding diverse news, without any re-ranking, also worked! 4/

Active time and engagements fell on Facebook and Reddit, but *increased* on X/Twitter. In any case the changes were small. Reducing polarization doesn't necessarily mean reducing engagement. Not every platform is on the frontier of good for society and good for business! 5/

The tradeoff: users reported slightly worse experiences (-0.04 SD) on the Neely Index. Maybe our research-grade algorithms were unpolished. Or maybe it's because seeing depolarizing content, like news, can be kind of a downer. This is an honest tension worth taking seriously. 6/

Unlike one-shot depolarization interventions, algorithm changes are structural. At 6 months we likely captured equilibrium effects, meaning sustainable results. And we couldn't measure network effects or change creator incentives, all of which would plausibly amplify results. 7/

Awesome to see this out. I've been curious about the results! This is massive. I have about 17 ideas I'll be queueing up for when the dataset is ready for sharing. Congratulations to everyone involved!

More people driven towards renewables enmasse - 1.45B in India - is a low hanging fruit to pick up! Can rest of the world help it move there faster - heavily polluted Indian Cities makes it a great investment with extremely low costs- like @jigarshahdc.bsky.social - just $1 T in investment!

Jigar Shah@jigarshahdc.bsky.social

India has a once-in-a-century opportunity to become a global energy superpower. Not because of oil or gas. Because of solar, wind, storage, and hydrogen. A $1T India New Energy Transition Fund could turn energy imports into energy exports. 🧵

Jigar Shah@jigarshahdc.bsky.social

India already has the lowest solar construction costs in the world. Solar EPC cost: US: ~$1.27/W Europe: ~$0.65/W India: ~$0.31/W But there’s a catch. India’s cost of capital is far higher, which wipes out much of that advantage

Jigar Shah@jigarshahdc.bsky.social

Renewable energy is mostly upfront capital cost. Unlike fossil fuels, where fuel and maintenance dominate. So financing cost matters enormously. Lower capital costs = dramatically cheaper energy. Fix financing and India becomes the lowest-cost clean energy producer on Earth.