5 ms·

> Creators are typically selling their own creation while influencers are using their reputation to sell something other than their creation. That's a bit miss

> Creators are typically selling their own creation while influencers are using their reputation to sell something other than their creation. That's a bit missing the point. Influencers as also creators are both doing the same, using the same tactics with the same goals. And more and more the differences are becoming blurry, as both are doing what the other side is doing. Creators advertising other products than their own is not uncommon. And Influencers starting to create also high quality-content outside of cheap social media-content is also happening quite often after they reach a certain point in their career. We also see very often confusion about who when someone is an influencer, when is someone a creator. Because technical everyone with reputation is influencing others, and everone is creating content when building their reputation via social media. And on top, we are specifically talking in context of social media with this terms. But they also exist outside of social media and predate them. Maybe, we should start using those terms for what they are and accept that people can be both, and not exclusivly one or the other.

teawrecks 5y ago
If someone both cooks and eats, does that confuse the description/roll of each task? I don't think so. We can talk about them independently and it doesn't change anything appreciably when one person happens to do both.
- slightwinder 5y ago
  Which is exactly what I said? We do not talk independently about them. You are either influencer or creator, not both.
shkkmo 5y ago
> Maybe, we should start using those terms for what they are and accept that people can be both, and not exclusivly one or the other. That seemes self evident to me. > Influencers as also creators are both doing the same, using the same tactics with the same goals. And more and more the differences are becoming blurry, as both are doing what the other side is doing. I disagree. When inluencing, the product is access to their follower and the customer is advertisers. When creating, the product is the content and the customers ate the consumers of that content. These two activities are pretty easily distinguishable and just because people do both doesn't make the activities less distinct. I think it is important to have both terms understood separately because they help understand the motivations and incentives behind the content that is being consumed.
- slightwinder 5y ago
  > When inluencing, the product is access to their follower and the customer is advertisers. > When creating, the product is the content and the customers ate the consumers of that content. With social media-influencer, the content they normally create is their live and personality (or the illusion they build of them), and this is also the product they sell and use to gain reputation. Sponsorings and placements are side-products they might sell, not their main-content. They can be more profitable then other sources of income, but they are not the only income people can have. Though, which ways they can utilize for income depends on the platform they use. Ontop, there are also influencers who do not advertize any product at all. People who do thinks just for the socializing, or the attention, or for some other reason. > These two activities are pretty easily distinguishable and just because people do both doesn't make the activities less distinct. The problem is not the activity, but the classification of the person. > they help understand the motivations Motivation is irrelevant. Motivation does not even work at all in either classification.
  - shkkmo 5y ago
    You seem to be conflating content and product and using "sell" in an overly broad sense. Understanding the motivations behind media creation is critical for navigating biases.
    - slightwinder 5y ago
      We talk about an industry were people receive money for just being themself. At the core of this "profession" the content is the product and procuct is the content. There is no way to distinguish this. > Understanding the motivations behind media creation is critical for navigating biases. No, it is for this completly irrelevant, because there is no straight path how influencer, creator and the whole industry evolved. People come with all kind of motivation and grow into all kind of paths and motiations. There is no "single truth" here, but a dozen different that just happen to lead all to the same result.
      - 5y ago

teawrecks 5y ago

If someone both cooks and eats, does that confuse the description/roll of each task? I don't think so. We can talk about them independently and it doesn't change anything appreciably when one person happens to do both.

slightwinder 5y ago
Which is exactly what I said? We do not talk independently about them. You are either influencer or creator, not both.

shkkmo 5y ago

> Maybe, we should start using those terms for what they are and accept that people can be both, and not exclusivly one or the other. That seemes self evident to me. > Influencers as also creators are both doing the same, using the same tactics with the same goals. And more and more the differences are becoming blurry, as both are doing what the other side is doing. I disagree. When inluencing, the product is access to their follower and the customer is advertisers. When creating, the product is the content and the customers ate the consumers of that content. These two activities are pretty easily distinguishable and just because people do both doesn't make the activities less distinct. I think it is important to have both terms understood separately because they help understand the motivations and incentives behind the content that is being consumed.

slightwinder 5y ago
> When inluencing, the product is access to their follower and the customer is advertisers. > When creating, the product is the content and the customers ate the consumers of that content. With social media-influencer, the content they normally create is their live and personality (or the illusion they build of them), and this is also the product they sell and use to gain reputation. Sponsorings and placements are side-products they might sell, not their main-content. They can be more profitable then other sources of income, but they are not the only income people can have. Though, which ways they can utilize for income depends on the platform they use. Ontop, there are also influencers who do not advertize any product at all. People who do thinks just for the socializing, or the attention, or for some other reason. > These two activities are pretty easily distinguishable and just because people do both doesn't make the activities less distinct. The problem is not the activity, but the classification of the person. > they help understand the motivations Motivation is irrelevant. Motivation does not even work at all in either classification.
- shkkmo 5y ago
  You seem to be conflating content and product and using "sell" in an overly broad sense. Understanding the motivations behind media creation is critical for navigating biases.
  - slightwinder 5y ago
    We talk about an industry were people receive money for just being themself. At the core of this "profession" the content is the product and procuct is the content. There is no way to distinguish this. > Understanding the motivations behind media creation is critical for navigating biases. No, it is for this completly irrelevant, because there is no straight path how influencer, creator and the whole industry evolved. People come with all kind of motivation and grow into all kind of paths and motiations. There is no "single truth" here, but a dozen different that just happen to lead all to the same result.
    - 5y ago