Human interactions create social networks forming the backbone of societies. Individuals adjust their opinions by exchanging information through social interactions. Two recurrent questions are whether social structures promote opinion polarisation or consensus in societies and whether polarisation can be avoided, particularly on social media. In this paper, we hypothesise that not only network structure but also the timings of social interactions regulate the emergence of opinion clusters. We devise a temporal version of the Deffuant opinion model where pairwise interactions follow temporal patterns and show that burstiness alone is sufficient to refrain from consensus and polarisation by promoting the reinforcement of local opinions. Individuals self-organise into a multi-partisan society due to network clustering, but the diversity of opinion clusters further increases with burstiness, particularly when individuals have low tolerance and prefer to adjust to similar peers. The emergent opinion landscape is well-balanced regarding clusters' size, with a small fraction of individuals converging to extreme opinions. We thus argue that polarisation is more likely to emerge in social media than offline social networks because of the relatively low social clustering observed online. Counter-intuitively, strengthening online social networks by increasing social redundancy may be a venue to reduce polarisation and promote opinion diversity.

In the era of social media, people frequently share their own opinions online on various issues and also in the way, get exposed to others' opinions. Be it for selective exposure of news feed recommendation algorithms or our own inclination to listen to opinions that support ours, the result is that we get more and more exposed to opinions closer to ours. Further, any population is inherently heterogeneous i.e. people will hold a varied range of opinions regarding a topic and showcase a varied range of openness to get influenced by others. In this paper, we demonstrate the different behavior put forward by open- and close-minded agents towards an issue, when allowed to freely intermix and communicate. We have shown that the intermixing among people leads to formation of opinion echo chambers i.e. a small closed network of people who hold similar opinions and are not affected by opinions of people outside the network. Echo chambers are evidently harmful for a society because it inhibits free healthy communication among all and thus, prevents exchange of opinions, spreads misinformation and increases extremist beliefs. This calls for reduction in echo chambers, because a total consensus of opinion is neither possible nor is welcome. We show that the number of echo chambers depends on the number of close-minded agents and cannot be lessened by increasing the number of open-minded agents. We identify certain 'moderate'-minded agents, who possess the capability of manipulating and reducing the number of echo chambers. The paper proposes an algorithm for intelligent placement of moderate-minded agents in the opinion-time spectrum by which the opinion echo chambers can be maximally reduced. With various experimental setups, we demonstrate that the proposed algorithm fares well when compared to placement of other agents (open- or close-minded) and random placement of 'moderate'-minded agents.