Platforming Risk
Aemula Writer Spotlight - 3.20.25
Publications and social media networks frequently face censorship pressure due to their deliberate decisions on the voices they choose to platform. The result is a perceived "platforming risk”, where fear of losing an audience or failing to present diverse perspectives influences the content that is included and promoted.
These active decisions inevitably create vulnerability, making neutrality nearly impossible to maintain. Why would a publication provide a platform for perspectives diverging from the beliefs of their audience? Why does a social media network choose to promote certain posts over others? With an endless stream of information competing for our finite attention, how can we determine the most relevant and impactful content while avoiding these traps?
As our political divide deepens, curators face increasing pressure to silence opposing views. We are naturally confident in our own beliefs, but decisions to exclusively platform perspectives that align with our beliefs only amplify polarization by restricting access to diverse ideas. This fragmentation isolates communities, preventing healthy debate and dialogue across our ideological divides.
The only effective way to avoid the censorship pressures around platforming is to remove the curator’s active role in deciding which perspectives get platformed altogether. However, this creates another problem since platform neutrality inherently means permitting all voices — even radical or factually incorrect ones.
To safeguard against harmful misinformation, a robust community-driven moderation process is essential. The community, rather than the platform itself, should have direct oversight over moderation decisions, preserving the neutrality of the platform.
Yet moderation alone is not sufficient. Curation is a vital part of the process in determining the content users can feasibly discover. Content preferences are inherently individualistic, which means curation must be individualized by meeting users where they are in their current beliefs. Over time, users can begin to explore and discover new perspectives on the periphery of these beliefs.
To accomplish this, Aemula utilizes a bridging-based algorithm, where an article’s promotion is directly tied to the diversity of users who support it. Unlike typical algorithms driven purely by engagement metrics — which often incentivize inflammatory, divisive content — Aemula rewards balanced perspectives and constructive discourse. This incentive structure transparently encourages writers to produce content appealing to diverse viewpoints, reversing the polarizing incentive structures of today's media systems.
With Aemula, we provide a verifiably neutral platform by:
Allowing anyone to publish directly to a peer-to-peer network that we do not control
Implementing a community-governed moderation protocol for deciding what content should be removed
Utilizing a fully transparent, open-source, human-readable algorithm capable of personalized content curation
The result is a diverse, incentive-aligned ecosystem that prioritizes meaningful engagement and reduces polarization rather than encouraging echo chambers and information silos.
This week, we highlight experts who discuss the effects of platform governance, the rationality within polarization, and insights into understanding biases.
Reimagining Technology
Written by Aviv Ovadya, a technologist and researcher, CEO and founder of the AI & Democracy Foundation, and affiliated with Harvard’s Berkman Klein Center, the Centre for Governance of AI, and the newDemocracy Foundation, focused on how we can live and govern transformative technology.
“For the last six years, I've spent a lot of my time trying to get platforms like Facebook and YouTube to make changes to address challenges like misinformation and polarization (arguably resulting from their AI recommendation objectives). I’ve also kept running against the same blockers when trying to get change to happen. They aren’t what many people expect—often the biggest blocker has nothing directly to do with $$$ or advertisers or even eyeballs2—it's about fear.
Platforms are scared (for good reason) that influential stakeholders will make their life very difficult if they make changes that hurt those stakeholders or their constituents. These stakeholders include factions in political battles all over the world who run the governments where the platforms operate—and where platform decisions can impact who wins those battles. Platform stakeholders also include powerful and conflicting (and important) civil rights organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) which fights for free speech and the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) which fights against hate speech.
Problems like misinformation, polarization, and hate speech are just hard, and there are no 100% clear answers—so there is essentially nothing a platform can decide that will gain broad trust of powerful stakeholders or the general public. Even if Google or Meta were non-profits, it would be hard for people to trust their actions on such important issues. This leaves the platforms stuck—it means the best thing for them to do (for their self-preservation) is often to take the minimal possible action.
That’s the platform perspective. That sucks for them. But it also sucks for us.”
Stranger Apologies
Written by Kevin Dorst, an MIT philosopher and cognitive scientist with work focused on bias, rationality, and depolarization.
“We seem to be losing our epistemic empathy: our ability to both be convinced that someone is wrong, and yet acknowledge that there are sensible reasons that led them to their opinions.
I think this is a disaster.
Put me in the camp of those who think the greatest threat to democratic institutions comes from the breakdown of toleration between parties, an increasing willingness to demonize the other side, and the the tit-for-tat electoral hardball that ensues.
That’s controversial. But even if you disagree, surely you’ll agree that our loss of epistemic empathy is a problem.”
Persuasion
A project of the Persuasion Institute, a nonpartisan nonprofit, Persuasion is an online magazine focused on threats to the free society — and reflections on how to fight back — with contributions from authors you already love and others you are yet to discover.
“Why couldn’t you be wrong about everything? I don’t mean this in the way philosophers raise annoying skeptical scenarios about whether an external world exists or whether the universe popped into existence five minutes ago. I mean, when it comes to our deep-rooted convictions—what most people have in mind when they use the word “belief”—getting things completely wrong seems like a live possibility. If you have strong beliefs, you must think those you disagree with are wrong. But if they can be totally wrong, why can’t you?
It’s alarming to contemplate this possibility. We organize much of our lives around our beliefs. We identify with them. We stake our reputations on them. It would be devastating to wake up and discover you had been wrong about everything.”
Interested in cross-posting your content to Aemula? Reach out to writers@aemula.com to get started! With cross-posting, you can:
Instantly expand your audience
Increase your earnings
Maintain full ownership of your work
Plus, you will have the opportunity to access community resources and grants to support the content you want to create! Cross-posting comes with no costs, no obligations, and you can stop or remove your content at any time.
The open beta version of the Aemula platform is live at aemula.com! Claim your 1-month free trial today! All it takes is an email address and 30 seconds!
If you want to support any of the writers we spotlight in our Substack, we highly encourage you to subscribe to their individual publications. If you want to support independent journalism more broadly, we offer both paid and free subscriptions for you to stay informed!
All Substack subscription revenue is reinvested directly into the independent journalism community.
Follow us on X to stay up-to-speed on platform updates and the writers we are adding to our community!
We would love to hear your thoughts on our mission in the comments!
