Is our destiny coded in the algorithm?
If you feel addicted to social media, this video is for you.
If you feel glued to whatever's on your feed and can't stop doom scrolling, this video is for you.
And if you're worried about how social media is rewiring your brain, this video is for you.
Don't skip it.
The number one health and wellness podcast.
Jay Shetty.
Jay Shetty.
The one, the only Jay Shetty.
I wanted to start today saying one thing.
The algorithm isn't as smart as we think it is.
But the deeper I went into my research, the more I realized something unsettling.
It's stronger than me, stronger than you, stronger than all of us because it knows our weaknesses.
But here's what I also found.
Even the strongest system has a glitch.
The algorithm doesn't just know us, it depends on us.
And if we learn how it feeds, we can decide whether to starve it or steer it.
When you Google the words will I ever, the first thing that comes up is will I ever find love?
The second is will I ever be enough?
And the third is will I am net worth?
We go from love to worth to money really quickly.
But this search for love, worth and belonging is what the algorithm exploits, but not in the way you think.
Picture this, it's midnight.
Think of a girl named Amelia, lies in bed, phone in her hand.
She posts a photo, nothing dramatic, just hoping someone notices.
The likes trickle in, her friends comment.
She taps on another girl's profile, prettier, thinner, more followers.
She lingers, she clicks, she scrolls.
The algorithm pays attention.
The next night, her feed feels different.
More flawless faces, more filters, more diets, more lives that look nothing like hers.
Curiosity turns into comparison.
Comparison turns into obsession.
And soon every scroll feels like it's whispering the same three words.
You're not enough.
Until one night, She doesn't see herself anymore.
She only sees the mirror the algorithm is holding up to her.
This isn't just Amelia's story.
56% of girls feel they can't live up to the beauty standards they see on social media.
90% of girls follow at least one social media account that makes them feel less beautiful.
But here's the real question.
Did the algorithm build that mirror or did she?
Was it coded in Silicon Valley or coded in her own clicks?
Let's look at the algorithm first.
What do algorithms actually do?
Number one, they watch.
Every pause, every click, every like, every share, even how long you hover over a video or comment.
TikTok tracks watch time down to the second.
If you rewatch a clip, it's a super strong signal.
Number two, they predict.
Using your history and the behaviors of millions of people like you, algorithms predict what are you most likely to engage with next.
If people who watch fitness videos also tend to watch diet hacks, you'll probably get diet hacks.
Number three, they amplify.
The posts that get more engagement, especially emotional engagement, are pushed to more people.
Number four, they adapt.
Every click retrains the system.
Your feed tomorrow is shaped by what you do today.
YouTube's recommendation engine is called a reinforcement system.
It's literally designed to learn from your actions in real time.
The most accurate model is a cycle.
First of all, we click what feels good, familiar or emotionally hot.
Two, the algorithm learns and serves us more of that to keep us there.
Number three, we become more entrenched and less exposed to alternatives.
And number four, outrage and division spread faster because anger is more contagious.
In plain words, the algorithm isn't a mastermind.
It's a machine that asks one question over and over again.
What will keep you here the longest?
It's like a maximum security prison.
So how do we get trapped?
First, the nudge.
Think Netflix autoplay, TikTok infinite scroll, the design that says don't think, don't choose, just keep watching.
That's how you start a Korean baking show you didn't even know existed, and three hours later you're crying over a documentary on penguins.
A study found disabling autoplay led to a 17-minute shorter average session.
Showing autoplay measurably extends watch time.
It's not a choice disappearing.
It's a choice so well hidden, you don't realize you never made it.
Second, the loop.
Yale researchers found, when people post moral outrage online, people reward them with likes and retweets.
That person now posts even more outrage the next time.
It's not the algorithm, it's us, it's real people.
As one researcher put it, we don't just consume outrage, we start producing it, because outrage performs better than honesty.
And third, the push.
Mozilla's YouTube Regrets Project from 2020 found that volunteers who started with neutral searches like fitness or politics, reported being steered toward extremist, conspiratorial or misogynistic content.
Women get more insecure about their appearance, Men get more exposed to misogynistic content.
Women experience more anxiety and self-doubt.
Men become more lonely and disconnected.
Women compare their lives to others and feel they're falling behind.
Men compare their status to others and feel like they're being left behind.
Both end up in the same place on social media isolated, exhausted and shaped by the same machine.
The algorithm will do anything to keep us glued.
There is a huge incentive issue for the algorithm, because in one study where they chose not to show toxic posts, users spent approximately 9 less time daily, experienced fewer ad impressions and generated fewer ad clicks.
The algorithm's goal is not to make us polarized.
It's not to make us happy.
It's to make us addicted and glued to our screens.
It is showing you what people like you are engaging with, assuming you will stay as well.
We talked about what the algorithm does.
Let's look at what role we play.
Our clicks build the cage.
False news stories are 70% more likely to be retweeted than true stories are.
It also takes true stories about six times as long to reach 1500 people as it does for false stories to reach the same number of people.
Algorithms don't see truth or lies.
They only see clicks from people like us.
Number two false news spreads six times faster than true news because shocking content sparks more clicks and shares from us.
So the algorithm promotes it further.
The content must already have emotional potency.
An algorithm won't manufacture depth or resonance from nothing.
It can't make it go viral.
We all want to feel better, to have more energy and more focus throughout the day.
That's why I co-founded Juni, a sparkling adaptogenic drink made with powerful ingredients like ashwagandha and lion's mane.
It's designed to boost your mood, support your focus and give you natural energy, all without the crash.
A new classic re-imagined.
We're so excited to officially launch our new lemonade iced tea flavor.
When we created Juni, my goal was simple.
I wanted to make drinks that help you feel balanced and energized without compromise.
Our upgraded take on the classic Arnold Palmer is crisp, refreshing and crafted with adaptogens to support energy, focus and mood.
All with zero sugar.
Be among the first to try it.
Available exclusively at drinkjunicom, where you can use the code ONPURPOSE20 for 20 off your first order.
Cheers to your daily mood boost.
Number three for major media outlets.
Each additional negative effect word in a post is associated with a 5 to 8 increase in shares and retweets from us.
And four Facebook studies showed that, even when given the opportunity, users clicked links confirming their bias far more often than opposing one.
Liberals chose cross-cutting news 21% of the time, conservatives 30% of the time.
Here's the twist.
The algorithm doesn't pick sides.
We do.
It just learns our choice and builds a fortress around it.
The danger isn't that we have no choice.
It's that we don't notice when our choices are being shaped for us.
So let's do a thought experiment.
Why don't we create a social media platform without these incentives?
One that doesn't play these games with us.
They already tried that.
And what I'm about to share with you shocked me the most.
A new study out of the University of Amsterdam tested this by creating a stripped down social network.
No ads, no recommendation algorithms, no invisible hand pushing content.
Researchers released 500 AI chatbots onto the platform, each powered by open AI, and gave them distinct political and social identities.
Then they let them loose.
Across five separate experiments amounting to 10000 interactions, the bots began to behave exactly like us.
They followed those who thought like them.
They reposted the loudest, most extreme voices.
They gravitated into echo chambers, not because an algorithm pushed them there, but because that's where they chose to go.
It also found that users who posted the most partisan content tended to get the most followers and reposts.
Researchers tried interventions dampening virality, hiding follower counts, even boosting opposing views, but nothing cracked the cycle.
The most they managed was a 6% reduction in partisan engagement.
In some cases, when they started hiding user bios, the divide actually grew sharper and the most extreme posts gained even more traction.
The implication is chilling.
Maybe it isn't just the algorithms that warp us.
Maybe social media itself is wired against our better nature.
Think about it like a funhouse mirror.
It doesn't simply reflect who we are.
It stretches our fears, it magnifies our biases, and turns our flaws into a spectacle.
As humans, we can live consciously or unconsciously.
We can choose our stronger selves or our weaker selves.
When we choose our weakest self, humans are not just curious.
We're programmed to measure ourselves against others.
Comparison is our oldest survival instinct.
Envy is the emotional fuel.
The algorithm didn't invent it, but it does exploit it.
When we're tired, overwhelmed, and exhausted, Humans are not ruled by curiosity.
We're ruled by comparison.
And envy is the price of admission.
The algorithm didn't create envy.
It just turned it into an economy.
Now, why do we do this?
The first is negativity bias.
Evolution tuned us to notice threats more than opportunities.
Missing a berry was fine.
Missing a snake was fatal.
Number two, outrage is social currency.
Expressing outrage signals loyalty to your group.
It tells others, I'm one of us.
And in polarized contexts, this isn't just emotion, it's identity signaling.
Clicking rage is clicking belonging.
Number three, cognitive efficiency.
Negative content is often simpler.
This is bad, they're wrong, we're threatened.
The brain prefers cognitive ease over nuance.
Complex, balanced content demands more effort.
Negativity feels immediate, digestible, and actionable.
So what do we do about this?
Doom scrolling increases cortisol, anxiety, and learned helplessness.
In that state, people feel like they have no agency, which can reinforce the sense of doom.
So we have an incentive issue for the platforms because they're just trying to keep us glued.
And we have a lack of mental resilience for us.
Put those both together, that's what we're experiencing right now.
So what do we do about the incentive issue?
People often ask me if I think AI will ever have a soul.
And my response is, I don't know if AI will ever have a soul.
I just hope the people building AI have a soul.
The people who created these algorithms will lose millions or billions if they adjusted the algorithm.
Will they do that?
Will they recognize or think they have a responsibility?
It's a really interesting thing to think about, Because it's almost like we're making something that is becoming us.
It's almost like Frankenstein, that idea that whatever system we build has a part of us in it.
If you build a company, it has a part of you in it.
There's an energetic exchange as well.
What does that feel like when you're building a platform that millions and billions of people use?
The truth is we can't afford to just diagnose the problem.
And I get intrigued by that sometimes, when people just want to diagnose the problem, but we need to find solutions.
And here are three changes social media companies could try.
The first is platforms should offer chronological feeds by default, not buried in settings, and give users transparent control to toggle between chronological and algorithmic.
Facebook's own studies show, chronological feeds reduce political polarization and misinformation exposure, though engagement does drop.
The second thing they could do is actually probably my favorite.
Add friction before sharing.
For example, read before retweet prompts, share limits, cooling off periods on viral posts.
Imagine you couldn't share something until you had read it in full.
Imagine you couldn't share something until you'd watched that video in full.
Get a complimentary can of Junie on me at any Whole Foods market.
Radhi and I created Juni with a simple intention, to help you feel better from the inside out.
It's a sparkling, adaptogenic drink crafted with ashwagandha, lion's mane and green tea to boost your mood, support your focus and give you clean, natural energy that stays with you throughout the day.
So go to drinkjunicom, forward slash j and run to your nearest Whole Foods market for your free Juni.
I can't wait for you to try it.
Cheers.
Twitter's 2020 read before retweet experiment led to a 40 increase in people opening articles before sharing.
WhatsApp's forwarding limits dramatically slowed misinformation in India.
This could actually make a difference, because not only are we misinforming others, we're under-informed ourselves.
If you're retweeting something just based on the headline and have no idea what's inside of it.
We're now propelling ideas that we don't fully grasp and understand.
And number three, require algorithmic transparency and independent audits.
Companies must publish how recommendation systems prioritize content and allow external researchers to study the impacts.
The EU's Digital Services Act is already moving this way, requiring large platforms to open their algorithms to scrutiny.
Now, what do we do about the human nature issue?
I want to share with you one of my favorite stories.
A student once asked the Buddha, what do you gain from meditation?
He said nothing.
The student asked, then why do you meditate if you gain nothing?
The Buddha replied, I don't meditate because of what I gain.
I meditate because of what I lose.
I lose anger.
I lose envy.
I lose ego.
If the algorithm is made of us, then changing it doesn't start with code.
It starts with character.
We have to remember that we are wired for generosity, but educated for greed.
When will we finally start teaching emotional mastery in schools?
How long before we start teaching critical thinking at an early age?
Maybe the real test isn't to build a happier network.
It's to build happier users.
We built a machine to know us, and it became us.
When we started On Purpose, there were only three things that went viral.
Cats and dogs, sorry to put them in the same group, babies, and people taking their clothes off.
I had the innocent intention, the naive vision of making wisdom go viral.
Today we do over 500 million views across platforms every month.
Not playing into rage bait, not trying to get people to be angry.
What does it show me?
It shows me that people will choose healthier options if they're available, if it's presented to them in a digestible way.
People will choose a salad if they know why it's better for them and if it's available and has a great dressing.
It's our role to not play into the fear and find ways to make love more attractive and accessible.
It's so easy to sell fear.
It's so easy to sell negativity.
It's so easy to sell gossip.
But the truth is, why sell the things that sell people short?
Why not provide them with alternatives that are healthy strengthening empowering, that give them the tools to make a difference in their life?
Here's the good news.
Algorithms do not fully decide your fate.
They're predictive, not deterministic.
They rely on your past clicks, but you can override them by searching, subscribing to diverse sources and consciously engaging with content outside of your bubble.
So I want you to take a look at a new account I started in the For You page.
The For You page is pretty simple.
It's beautiful imagery.
It's introducing me to a couple of scenery.
And as I scroll down, you start to see more of what the average person would see.
The For You page.
As you go deeper, shows you everything from political podcasts, shows me people working out, shows me influencer content.
Now I'm going to show you how easy it is to change your For You page.
Because this page is so visual, I'm going to do it through finding quotes.
And also, you know I love quotes.
So I'm going to go follow some quotes.
I'm going to like some quotes.
Going to like another quote.
I'm going to hover over it for a while.
This is really important to actually hover over the quote, to actually read it, to actually be present with it.
And now I'm even going to share a quote with a friend who's now going to think they have an issue because I just shared some wisdom with them.
When I refresh, check out my For You page.
It's pretty much all quotes.
Through three to four simple steps, I transformed my For You page.
This is almost a cleansing, filtering process that I recommend you do.
It's simple.
I want you to follow five people you wouldn't usually follow.
Agency isn't eliminated, it's eroded by habit.
People who intentionally curate their feeds, limit usage or diversify inputs show significantly less polarization.
The second thing I want you to do is hover over and comment on five pieces of content you want to see more of.
Your offline life still matters.
Real books, real conversations and communities can counteract the digital echo chamber.
And number three, I want you to share five pieces of content you wouldn't usually and see how that changes your algorithms.
Number four, don't look at your phone first thing in the morning.
It's like letting 100 strangers walk into your bedroom before you've brushed your teeth or washed your face.
You would never do that in real life.
Don't do it online.
And five, be present with joy.
Celebrate your friends' wins and accomplishments.
Stop overreacting to negativity and underreacting to joy.
We remember the bad times more than the good times, because when we lose we cry for a month and when we win, we celebrate for a night.
Here's what I want you to remember.
When you like something, you're telling the algorithm, show me more of this.
When you hover over something you're saying to the algorithm, I pay attention.
When you show me this
When you comment on something, you're saying this is really important to me.
And when you share it off the platform, you're saying, fill my feed with this.
You're co-creating your algorithm.
You're actually coding it.
One of my favorite thoughts comes from F. Scott Fitzgerald.
He said the test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time and still retain the ability to function.
One should, for example, he said, be able to see that things are hopeless and and yet be determined to make them otherwise.
That second part is so needed right now.
That's what our stories need.
Accepting that things are tough, things are really hard and, at the same time, reminding each other that you can make a change.
You can transform your life.
You can take accountability.
You can take action.
You do have agency reminding the world that extraordinary things have always been achieved by a group of ordinary people.
I'll leave you with this.
Imagine you walk into a party.
At first, it looks fun.
People laughing, music playing, stories being told.
But then you notice something strange.
Everywhere you turn, someone's doing better than you.
Someone richer, someone prettier, someone with more friends, more followers, more success.
You walk into another room and this one feels worse.
The room is full of arguments.
Everyone's shouting.
No one's listening.
And the louder and angrier someone is, the bigger the crowd around them.
That's when it hits you.
You never chose to come to this room.
You were invited by the algorithm.
That's the cruel genius of social media.
It doesn't force us into comparison.
It discovers we're already drawn to it.
It doesn't create division.
It learns that anger holds our gaze longer than joy.
The algorithm didn't create outrage.
It turned outrage into entertainment.
And here's the question only you can answer.
When you pick up your phone tonight, are you walking back into that same party?
Or will you finally leave?
Thank you for listening.
I hope you've subscribed.
Share this episode with someone who needs to hear it.
And remember, I'm forever in your corner and I'm always rooting for you.
If you loved this episode, you will also love my interview with Charles Duhigg on how to hack your brain, change any habit effortlessly and the secret to making better decisions.
Look, am I hesitating on this because I'm scared of making the choice, because I'm scared of doing the work?
Or am I sitting with this because it just doesn't feel right yet?
