Professor Ekaterina Zhuravskaya delivered the Economic Journal Lecture at the Royal Economic Society Annual Conference 2026, examining how mobile internet and social media have changed political communication, competition and voter attitudes.
Mobile broadband has transformed how people access information. It has also changed how political candidates reach voters, how movements organise and how social media platforms decide which political messages people see.
In her Economic Journal Lecture, Professor Ekaterina Zhuravskaya of the Paris School of Economics reviewed a decade of research into the political effects of mobile broadband and social media.
She argued that these technologies have contributed to major changes in political competition, including the decline of established parties, the rise of new political movements and a weakening of the advantages traditionally held by incumbents.
A new form of political communication
The spread of 3G, followed by 4G and 5G, gave much of the world access to broadband internet through mobile devices. This allowed people to exchange photographs and videos, spend more time online and access social media wherever they were.
Professor Zhuravskaya described mobile broadband as the main catalyst for the growth of social media. A substantial proportion of voters now receive at least some of their political news through social platforms. In the United States, she noted that around a quarter of adults receive all their political news from social media, while around half receive at least some.
Social media differs from earlier forms of political communication in several important ways.
The barriers to becoming a political broadcaster are low. Candidates, activists and members of the public can communicate directly with large audiences without first passing through political parties or traditional media organisations.
This can expose corruption or poor government performance. It also allows people who would previously have struggled to gain media attention to establish a political following and enter politics.
Social media also makes coordination easier. Users can share information about protests, campaigns and political events, helping groups overcome the collective action problems involved in organising political activity.
The third difference is the growing role of feed algorithms. These systems decide which posts users see and in what order, usually with the aim of increasing engagement.
What feed algorithms change
Social media feeds were once largely chronological, showing posts from accounts selected by the user.
Algorithmic feeds work differently. They reorder posts, recommend material from accounts the user does not follow and reduce the visibility of some posts from accounts the user has chosen to follow.
“They fully control your feed”
Professor Ekaterina Zhuravskaya
This matters because content that generates anger or reinforces existing views can attract more engagement. Misinformation also has an advantage because it does not need to remain constrained by the facts.
Even an algorithm with no stated political preference may therefore promote inflammatory or highly partisan material if that content keeps users on the platform.
Professor Zhuravskaya presented findings from a study of the political effects of the feed algorithm on X, formerly Twitter.
The study followed around 5,000 active users in the United States during the summer of 2023. Participants were randomly assigned either the platform’s algorithmic For You feed or a chronological feed showing posts from accounts they followed. They were paid to remain on the assigned feed for seven weeks.
The research was conducted independently of X. This allowed the researchers to study the platform without its involvement and compare what happened when the algorithm was switched on with what happened when it was switched off.
Why switching the algorithm on and off produced different results
Exposure to the algorithmic feed increased engagement and changed political attitudes among users who had previously used the chronological feed.
After seven weeks, these users were more likely to select Republican policy priorities, object to the investigations of Donald Trump and express negative views about Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy.
Across the full set of measures used in the study, attitudes generally moved in a more pro-Republican direction. The effects were concentrated among Republicans and independents, while the views of committed Democrats changed little.
However, removing the algorithm from users who had already been exposed to it produced no comparable change.
Professor Zhuravskaya argued that this difference helps explain why earlier research found that turning off social media algorithms changed what people saw but had little effect on their political views.
The initial exposure had already influenced which accounts users chose to follow. Once the algorithm was removed, posts from those accounts continued to appear in the chronological feed.
The study found that the algorithm promoted political content and gave greater prominence to conservative material than liberal material. It also reduced the visibility of traditional news organisations while promoting posts from individual political activists.
Users exposed to the algorithm began following more conservative political activists. That change to their network remained after the algorithm was switched off.
The lasting effect therefore came partly from the accounts the algorithm encouraged people to follow, not only from the posts it placed directly in front of them.
Mobile broadband and trust in government
The lecture also considered the broader political effects of mobile broadband beyond individual social media platforms.
Research linking the spread of mobile broadband with survey data from countries around the world found that public approval of government declined after mobile broadband reached an area.
The effect was concentrated in countries where internet content was not heavily censored. It was also stronger where traditional media organisations were more dependent on political elites.
The response to the Panama Papers provided further evidence of this information channel. The leak exposed the financial arrangements of politicians and public figures around the world. Attitudes towards political corruption changed more in areas with mobile broadband coverage than in areas of the same countries that did not yet have coverage.
This suggests that mobile internet affects politics partly by giving voters access to information that was previously harder to obtain through established media.
“The increase in political competition and political turnover is a good thing for politics.”
Professor Ekaterina Zhuravskaya
The declining advantage of incumbents
Greater access to information can also change who is able to compete for political office.
Professor Zhuravskaya presented recent research into elections for the United States Congress. Historically, incumbent candidates enjoyed a significant electoral advantage. Before the widespread introduction of mobile broadband, this advantage was stable at around 11 percentage points.
It has since fallen to approximately three percentage points.
The decline occurred more quickly in areas that received mobile broadband earlier. Challengers became better known among voters and gained new opportunities to raise money, reducing the informational and financial advantages enjoyed by sitting politicians.
The research also found that greater voter knowledge affected incumbents and challengers differently. More information about challengers was associated with stronger support for them, while more information about incumbents was associated with weaker support.
Mobile broadband therefore appears to have made it easier for challengers to compete with established politicians.
More competition, but new risks
Professor Zhuravskaya concluded that mobile broadband and social media have contributed to greater political competition and turnover.
Lower barriers to communication can help voters scrutinise governments and give challengers a better chance of entering politics. In many cases, that can strengthen political accountability.
The same technologies can also amplify inflammatory content and help parties with authoritarian aims gain support. Greater political competition will not necessarily strengthen democracy when successful candidates use their position to weaken democratic institutions.
The political effects of the internet therefore depend partly on who gains from the new information environment and how social media platforms choose the content they promote.
Watch the full Economic Journal Lecture
This article covers some of the main findings presented in Professor Ekaterina Zhuravskaya’s Economic Journal Lecture, including her research on feed algorithms, mobile broadband and political competition.
The full recording is available to Royal Economic Society members through the RES Members’ Portal.
Please log in to watch the recording or become a RES member to access this and other selected keynote lectures from the Annual Conference 2026.