4 ms·

This is a very timely issue that not many are discussing. Once a creator becomes popular, they often become sponsored, and a lot of the gear they use (which al

This is a very timely issue that not many are discussing. Once a creator becomes popular, they often become sponsored, and a lot of the gear they use (which also sets them apart from regular creators) is given to them through sponsorships. It's not an unfair advantage to the sponsored creator, but it does prove to be an unfair advantage to their competitors when you consider they are displayed on each site. Think about an independent film producer competing against a major studio produce a film.. This kind of ecosystem completely destroys the value of independent artists and favors big industry every time. There are literally thousands of talented people creating content totally for free over many years because of the myth of an eventual payoff that is the very basis of modern-day creator funds. These platforms don't have separate categories for content creators based on their funding and content to fairly display everyone as equals, or among people operating on each level of ability/funding, why? because platforms favor proven earners and big industry -- Thy also don't want unknown creators to potentially replace chosen creators as well in a lot of cases. Money/Profit drives platforms, not content, and not a concern for discovering new talent, but platforms want independent content contributed without providing opportunity and without paying independent creators for it (of course). Platforms create the dream of discovery and work hard to lure independent creators with the ideal that they can grow on them purely as fish bait to cover the fact that most already engineer their featured content heavily to be pre-determined and fixed. Don't get me wrong, occasionally new talent slips through, but it's very rare in frequency. Because top creators make so much, there's an entire network built around them, where platforms promote them and where algorithms keep them on top of everyone else, by featuring top streamers and earners on repeat, and by featuring them on front pages, while unknowns stay buried, without even an occasional mention on a featured page. If you look at black hat forums, there are hundreds of people paying and faking their way in order to become popular and successful, and even some scammers are making more money off of fake music and streaming than really talented independent artists in music and video production. The current state of social media algorithms is not based on discovering talent, it is based on making companies money, and in covertly limiting user options for choices in featured content to make platform revenue stable. A better way to look at the process of creating things as an independent artist is to focus on building locally, and in not trying to emulate nor compete with big industry, because the burnout is real, and the chances of growing, lasting, and thriving in massive creator-based ecosystem now are very very slim. Create your own web site, and own your own platform, because if you're an unknown or independent artist, major platforms aren't promoting you as well as a more dedicated online presence can.

zavertnik 5y ago
> Once a creator becomes popular, they often become sponsored, and a lot of the gear they use (which also sets them apart from regular creators) is given to them through sponsorships. I'd wager in terms of 'gaming gear', this could be true. But I don't necessarily believe that these bigger streamers are going w/o an equipment bill at some stage of their career. > This kind of ecosystem completely destroys the value of independent artists and favors big industry every time. The problem I have with this is that this is just a criticism of capitalism. Independent artists all share a goal: being recognized for their skills, and if they choose to, to make money off of it. > These platforms don't have separate categories for content creators based on their funding and content to fairly display everyone as equals, I'd argue that it's completely okay to say that not all creators create equally good content. > or among people operating on each level of ability/funding, why? I think we should divorce this idea that good content comes from good funding. Many of these popular streamers are still using shitty webcams in their totally normal bedroom, being lit entirely by their monitor, using a headset microphone. When the cost of getting the "premium" look boils down to any a7 mirrorless camera with a lens that has a minimum f/ of 2.8, we're not talking big bucks here. > because platforms favor proven earners and big industry -- Thy also don't want unknown creators to potentially replace chosen creators as well in a lot of cases. I think this is backwards. The platform favors popular streamers, who by virtue of being popular, make money. > Money/Profit drives platforms, not content, and not a concern for discovering new talent, but platforms want independent content contributed without providing opportunity and without paying independent creators for it (of course). Platforms create the dream of discovery and work hard to lure independent creators with the ideal that they can grow on them purely as fish bait to cover the fact that most already engineer their featured content heavily to be pre-determined and fixed. But this dream of discovery isn't dead. It's just not the first thing you see when you go to Twitch. I think that makes sense, no? > Don't get me wrong, occasionally new talent slips through, but it's very rare in frequency. This is true, and I totally agree. There are a lot of people who will not get the spotlight. There are a lot of people who are extremely talented who will not get the spotlight. This is because it takes more than just a good visual aesthetic/quality to get popular on these services. You have to be a good marketer, you have to mesh within a community, and you have to know how to build an audience vs. knowing how to entertain an audience. This dilemma is no different than all the people who want to be actors, singers, writers, ect. > If you look at black hat forums, there are hundreds of people paying and faking their way in order to become popular and successful, and even some scammers are making more money off of fake music and streaming than really talented independent artists in music and video production. The current state of social media algorithms is not based on discovering talent, it is based on making companies money, and in covertly limiting user options for choices in featured content to make platform revenue stable. And we see this fail time and time again, IMO. If you buy 100k followers, you're gonna have to buy a ton of likes every time you tweet/post to sustain the image of success. I don't think people who do this often succeed, but more power to the ones who do because I think this is a totally practical and fair way to get into an industry. > A better way to look at the process of creating things as an independent artist is to focus on building locally, and in not trying to emulate nor compete with big industry, because the burnout is real, and the chances of growing, lasting, and thriving in massive creator-based ecosystem now are very very slim. Create your own web site, and own your own platform, because if you're an unknown or independent artist, major platforms aren't promoting you as well as a more dedicated online presence can. I hate to say it, but I think deep down, people do not want to explore unknown creators. That's why your chances are slim. I don't want to watch 10 streams of someone who has not learned how to entertain an audience (which is the reason why I'd be watching) to maybe come across 1 stream that does entertain me, only to find out that this person streams every "once in a while". I think you brought up a lot of valuable thoughts about this streaming industry, but I hesitate to agree with a lot of what you said simply on the premise that any given job in which you have more people wishing to hold a position than positions available will inevitably lead to a lot of people being left behind, whether it be due to poor luck, underdeveloped abilities, ect.

zavertnik 5y ago

> Once a creator becomes popular, they often become sponsored, and a lot of the gear they use (which also sets them apart from regular creators) is given to them through sponsorships. I'd wager in terms of 'gaming gear', this could be true. But I don't necessarily believe that these bigger streamers are going w/o an equipment bill at some stage of their career. > This kind of ecosystem completely destroys the value of independent artists and favors big industry every time. The problem I have with this is that this is just a criticism of capitalism. Independent artists all share a goal: being recognized for their skills, and if they choose to, to make money off of it. > These platforms don't have separate categories for content creators based on their funding and content to fairly display everyone as equals, I'd argue that it's completely okay to say that not all creators create equally good content. > or among people operating on each level of ability/funding, why? I think we should divorce this idea that good content comes from good funding. Many of these popular streamers are still using shitty webcams in their totally normal bedroom, being lit entirely by their monitor, using a headset microphone. When the cost of getting the "premium" look boils down to any a7 mirrorless camera with a lens that has a minimum f/ of 2.8, we're not talking big bucks here. > because platforms favor proven earners and big industry -- Thy also don't want unknown creators to potentially replace chosen creators as well in a lot of cases. I think this is backwards. The platform favors popular streamers, who by virtue of being popular, make money. > Money/Profit drives platforms, not content, and not a concern for discovering new talent, but platforms want independent content contributed without providing opportunity and without paying independent creators for it (of course). Platforms create the dream of discovery and work hard to lure independent creators with the ideal that they can grow on them purely as fish bait to cover the fact that most already engineer their featured content heavily to be pre-determined and fixed. But this dream of discovery isn't dead. It's just not the first thing you see when you go to Twitch. I think that makes sense, no? > Don't get me wrong, occasionally new talent slips through, but it's very rare in frequency. This is true, and I totally agree. There are a lot of people who will not get the spotlight. There are a lot of people who are extremely talented who will not get the spotlight. This is because it takes more than just a good visual aesthetic/quality to get popular on these services. You have to be a good marketer, you have to mesh within a community, and you have to know how to build an audience vs. knowing how to entertain an audience. This dilemma is no different than all the people who want to be actors, singers, writers, ect. > If you look at black hat forums, there are hundreds of people paying and faking their way in order to become popular and successful, and even some scammers are making more money off of fake music and streaming than really talented independent artists in music and video production. The current state of social media algorithms is not based on discovering talent, it is based on making companies money, and in covertly limiting user options for choices in featured content to make platform revenue stable. And we see this fail time and time again, IMO. If you buy 100k followers, you're gonna have to buy a ton of likes every time you tweet/post to sustain the image of success. I don't think people who do this often succeed, but more power to the ones who do because I think this is a totally practical and fair way to get into an industry. > A better way to look at the process of creating things as an independent artist is to focus on building locally, and in not trying to emulate nor compete with big industry, because the burnout is real, and the chances of growing, lasting, and thriving in massive creator-based ecosystem now are very very slim. Create your own web site, and own your own platform, because if you're an unknown or independent artist, major platforms aren't promoting you as well as a more dedicated online presence can. I hate to say it, but I think deep down, people do not want to explore unknown creators. That's why your chances are slim. I don't want to watch 10 streams of someone who has not learned how to entertain an audience (which is the reason why I'd be watching) to maybe come across 1 stream that does entertain me, only to find out that this person streams every "once in a while". I think you brought up a lot of valuable thoughts about this streaming industry, but I hesitate to agree with a lot of what you said simply on the premise that any given job in which you have more people wishing to hold a position than positions available will inevitably lead to a lot of people being left behind, whether it be due to poor luck, underdeveloped abilities, ect.