The Next Phase of Democracy Tech
Why we need to move beyond content moderation toward proactive civic technologies
For years, the conversation about fixing social media has centered on content moderation: what gets taken down, who makes those decisions, and whether it’s censorship or safety.
But what if we’re asking the wrong question?
Instead of only reacting to the harm, what if we invested in designing digital spaces that promote healthier interactions from the start?
Kristin Hansen, Executive Director of Civic Health Project, put it bluntly on the podcast:
“Can we hack the mechanisms that have enabled the outrage to scale and flip that around so that cooperation can scale, so that problem solving can scale?
And maybe most importantly from our perspective so that the kinds of civic norms and social norms that we embrace and model in our real world day-to-day lives can also carry over into online spaces.”
Flipping the incentives
That’s the crux of the challenge. Right now, outrage scales because it’s what algorithms are designed to reward: high engagement, strong emotions, content you can’t look away from. The business model thrives on keeping us riled up.
So the next phase of democracy tech isn’t just about taking harmful content down—it’s about creating systems where prosocial content spreads as fast as toxic content does today.
As Hansen explained:
“It’s been rigged. We can unrig it. And we can do it at scale.”
This requires not only different tools but different ways of thinking about online communities. Instead of policing them after the fact, we need to cultivate the conditions that make civility and connection the default.
Examples from the field
Across the democracy tech ecosystem, there are already efforts underway to flip these incentives. Here’s some examples identified by The Council on Tech and Social Cohesion:
Search for Common Ground convenes the Bamako Forum on Digital and Social Cohesion, bringing together multiple stakeholders in Mali, Burkina Faso, and Niger to design healthier digital spaces in conflict zones. They’ve also created a curriculum for digital community stewards—now available online—to help moderators and group leaders foster trust and cohesion.
New_Public runs a Community Stewards Guild that equips online stewards with training and shared practices. Their work contributes design patterns that help platforms foster healthier conversations rather than inflaming division.
The Integrity Institute released Build in Integrity: Best Practices for Start Ups and Early Stage Companies, a playbook for founders to integrate integrity systems into platform design from day one—before the harmful dynamics take root.
These initiatives represent a shift from reaction to prevention, from moderation to proactive design for democracy.
Why it matters
We already know what happens when social media rewards division: tribalism grows, trust erodes, addictive outrage dominates.
But what happens if we flip the incentives? What if kindness, empathy, and constructive dialogue were rewarded with the same algorithmic boost as anger and contempt?
That’s the vision Hansen and many others are working toward—an internet where the forces that divide us can also be repurposed to bring us together.
As Hansen reminded me, these challenges aren’t just about “bad actors” out there—they’re about our very human impulses:
“Most of us are just humans doing human, right? We get triggered, we react to things, we defend our tribes, we attack other tribes. All of this wiring is in us. And that’s where the social cues and the coaching that comes from important people around us—our parents, our teachers, our peers—matter so much. How do we create those same roles online, so that when we’re just being fallible humans, we’re still receiving good cues that remind us, hey, this isn’t how we treat each other?”
That’s the heart of democracy tech: not simply moderating content, but building systems that model and reinforce the norms of healthy civic life—the same way a teacher, coach, or parent might guide us offline.
These initiatives represent a shift from reaction to prevention, from moderation to proactive design for democracy.
From theory to practice: Normsy.ai
All of this raises a key question: what does it actually look like to flip the incentives in practice?
That’s why I spoke with Kristin Hansen, who is leading one of the most ambitious experiments in this space: Normsy.ai.
Normsy.ai combines human judgment with AI-powered tools to intervene in toxic online conversations—not by silencing voices, but by introducing responses that reinforce civic norms and constructive dialogue. The goal isn’t to change the mind of the original poster, but to shape the wider audience watching the exchange.
In our conversation, Hansen described how this approach can make pro-social behavior more visible, rewarding, and—over time—viral. It’s a way of showing what the internet might look like if cooperation, empathy, and civility were given the same algorithmic boost as outrage.
If you’re curious about what it takes to reclaim the internet and make digital spaces healthier, I encourage you to listen to the full episode of Outrage Overload:
Meet The Avoidant Reluctant
Not everyone is tuned into politics every day. In fact, many people want nothing to do with it. For them, political talk feels like stress, conflict, or ruined holidays. They’d rather walk away than wade in.
We call this listener type The Avoidant Reluctant. They don’t watch the news closely, don’t enjoy debates, and may not even vote every election. But that doesn’t mean politics leaves them untouched. They still feel the ripple effects of outrage when it creeps into family conversations, friendships, and community spaces.
For Avoidant Reluctants, what resonates isn’t policy or partisanship — it’s relationships, community, and peace of mind. They want tools to reduce stress and keep loved ones close, even in a divided world.
As I build Outrage Overload, I’m paying attention to voices like these too. They may never become regular podcast listeners, but they help me remember this project isn’t just about politics — it’s about people.
👉 Do you know an “Avoidant Reluctant” in your life? Maybe a family member who shuts down at the dinner table when politics comes up? Hit reply — I’d love to hear your stories.