Hi Philip-J-Fry, thanks for reading and responding! I really appreciate it. I actually totally agree with you—my original title for this piece was actually, "If You Can't Afford to Do It for Free, Don't Be a Creator." (Editors suggested a new title so I deferred, but you can see a trace of it at the URL.)
The problem is, more and more people are turning to this as a viable source of income. In the piece, I reference the tragic death of Mocha, who turned to Bilibili to stream when he had nowhere to work (https://www.inkstonenews.com/society/aching-hopelessness-nob...).
Of course, dream jobs change as people grow up and figure out feasibility, so I'm not too concerned about that. Plus, I have no intention to squish anyone's dreams, but I was hoping for this piece to do two things:
1. Paint a clearer picture of the economics of platforms, and that—for most people—it's generally a terrible way to make money.
2. Encourage media, platforms, and other creators to share more data and facts, instead of another, "This high schooler made $1 million in 5 weeks on Snapchat." https://people.com/human-interest/snapchat-high-school-senio...
This is an old story. People will know the odds of starting a band and becoming a rock star, and still do it. So I just want to make sure people go all-in on it with deliberation, and that the most marginalized people don't turn to it when they most need it.
Williamdclt put it well: "Well, it's not that simple is it. For decades actors, musicians and artists have been complaining that they have to live in misery to pursue their art and fighting for better conditions, it's not like they've always been OK with the status quo."
If platforms do have an opportunity to better distribute the income for creative work, I think it's worth collective action from creators to put pressure on them to do it. If that means changing the algorithm to spotlight more people's videos, which means the popular videos effectively cross-subsidize them (like a record label would back in the day), I would think it's worth trying.
I did not expect so many comments on this entry, so I'll do my best to contribute—but yours was at the top so I figured I'd start here! Thanks again.
The problem is, more and more people are turning to this as a viable source of income. In the piece, I reference the tragic death of Mocha, who turned to Bilibili to stream when he had nowhere to work (https://www.inkstonenews.com/society/aching-hopelessness-nob...).
There's some more evidence—say, people trying to calculate how much TikTok engagement they'll need to stream to get Christmas gifts (https://twitter.com/robyncaplan/status/1328432778942312449). That, plus the survey that more children want to become a vlogger when they grow up (https://arstechnica.com/science/2019/07/american-kids-would-...), is why I wrote the piece.
Of course, dream jobs change as people grow up and figure out feasibility, so I'm not too concerned about that. Plus, I have no intention to squish anyone's dreams, but I was hoping for this piece to do two things:
1. Paint a clearer picture of the economics of platforms, and that—for most people—it's generally a terrible way to make money. 2. Encourage media, platforms, and other creators to share more data and facts, instead of another, "This high schooler made $1 million in 5 weeks on Snapchat." https://people.com/human-interest/snapchat-high-school-senio...
This is an old story. People will know the odds of starting a band and becoming a rock star, and still do it. So I just want to make sure people go all-in on it with deliberation, and that the most marginalized people don't turn to it when they most need it.
Williamdclt put it well: "Well, it's not that simple is it. For decades actors, musicians and artists have been complaining that they have to live in misery to pursue their art and fighting for better conditions, it's not like they've always been OK with the status quo."
If platforms do have an opportunity to better distribute the income for creative work, I think it's worth collective action from creators to put pressure on them to do it. If that means changing the algorithm to spotlight more people's videos, which means the popular videos effectively cross-subsidize them (like a record label would back in the day), I would think it's worth trying.
I did not expect so many comments on this entry, so I'll do my best to contribute—but yours was at the top so I figured I'd start here! Thanks again.