Lawfare Daily: What’s Influencing Politics Online? X’s Algorithm, Creators, and the New Persuasion Machine
Get the full intelligence
Search transcripts, export clips, track mentions, and explore all topics from “Lawfare Daily: What’s Influencing Politics Online? X’s Algorithm, Creators, and the New Persuasion Machine” inside PodZeus.
This episode of the Lawfare Podcast explores the complex dynamics of political influence on social media, focusing on the interplay between algorithmic feeds and trusted content creators. Drawing on two groundbreaking studies—one examining the effects of X's (formerly Twitter) algorithmic feed on political opinions, and another analyzing how mass creators shape political views during the 2024 elections—the discussion reveals that both platform architecture and human relationships are critical drivers of persuasion. The research shows that switching to X's algorithmic feed shifts users' political opinions to the right, but turning it off does not reverse this effect—suggesting that the algorithm's influence persists through changes in who users follow. Meanwhile, the study on creators finds that apolitical, culturally focused influencers are more persuasive than overtly political ones, likely due to higher perceived trustworthiness and stronger parasocial connections. Together, the findings underscore that online influence is not a single force but a layered system of nudges, where repeated exposure and network effects compound over time. The conversation then turns to policy implications, with experts calling for systemic transparency, long-term societal health metrics in platform design, and regulatory frameworks that prioritize real-world impacts—especially on vulnerable populations—over engagement alone. The hosts emphasize that the power to shape public discourse lies not just in what content is shown, but in how platforms structure attention, trust, and relationships. They caution against over-relying on individual choice or algorithmic opt-outs, given the lasting, asymmetric effects of early exposure. Ultimately, the episode argues that the future of democratic discourse online depends on rethinking platform incentives, increasing research access, and separating powerful tech conglomerates from their broader economic and political influence.
Switching to X's algorithmic feed shifts users' political opinions to the right, but turning it off does not reverse this effect—suggesting lasting changes in follower networks.
Apolitical creators are more persuasive than political ones per video, likely due to higher perceived trust and parasocial connection.
Platform algorithms don't just recommend content—they reshape users' social networks, which then sustain influence even after algorithmic exposure ends.
Current research is limited by lack of access to platform data; systemic transparency and independent audits are urgently needed.
Regulation should focus on measurable societal outcomes (e.g., mental health, social trust) rather than just engagement or content moderation.
…and 2 more takeaways available in PodZeus
The Dual Forces of Influence: Algorithms vs. Creators
The episode opens with a discussion on the layered nature of online influence, introducing the central question: is political persuasion driven by platform algorithms or by trusted content creators? Host Renee DiResta frames the conversation around two complementary studies—one on X’s feed algorithm and another on the impact of mass creators during the 2024 elections.
The Asymmetry of Algorithmic Influence on X
“Switching the algorithm on shifts political opinions, but switching it off does not reverse those effects. The network you build under algorithmic influence sticks.”
Why Apolitical Creators Are More Persuasive
“On a per-video basis, the more cultural, less political creators were more influential. They had much larger treatment effects.”
The Role of Trust, Engagement, and Platform Architecture
The panel explores why news outlets struggle on platforms like X—lacking engagement and responsiveness—while charismatic creators thrive. The discussion highlights the importance of parasocial relationships, repeated exposure, and platform design in shaping credibility and influence.
The Limits of Individual Choice and the Need for Systemic Reform
“We need a much better infrastructure to create transparency. Any study is just one puzzle piece.”
“The question is not whether social media affects politics. It’s where that power sits and what it means for the public sphere.”
“I would hope that the product leadership of all these companies shift their emphasis on their optimization timelines from short-term to long-term.”
“Switching the algorithm on shifts political opinions, but switching it off does not reverse those effects. The network you build under algorithmic influence sticks.”
Host
Guests
X
other
Nathaniel Lubin
person
Helene Widmer
person
Renee DiResta
person
Elon Musk
person
other
The Better Internet Initiative
organization
The Lawfare Podcast
media
New York Times
organization
Nature
other
Lawfare Daily: Joel Braunold on West Bank Violence and Israel’s New Lebanon Offensive
The Lawfare Podcast • 49m • 4/1/2026
Lawfare Daily: Beyond the Headlines: A History of U.S.-Iran Relations
The Lawfare Podcast • 1h 2m • 4/2/2026
Rational Security: The "Chicken Sh*t Bingo" Edition
The Lawfare Podcast • 1h 8m • 4/2/2026
Lawfare Daily: The Privacy Law That's Supposed To Be Protecting Us Online Turns 40
The Lawfare Podcast • 38m • 4/3/2026
Lawfare Archive: How to Steal a Presidential Election
The Lawfare Podcast • 57m • 4/4/2026
Get the full intelligence
Search transcripts, export clips, track mentions, and explore all topics from “Lawfare Daily: What’s Influencing Politics Online? X’s Algorithm, Creators, and the New Persuasion Machine” inside PodZeus.
Start discovering podcast insights today
Start with a 7-day trial and explore a growing catalog of popular podcasts. No credit card required.
No credit card required • 7-day trial • Cancel anytime
