Present Creator Monetization Methods Only Favor The Top Few Percent
But It Doesn't Have To Be That Way
Last week Sara Fischer for Axios wrote a report on the Creator Economy entitled “The Creator Economy Is Failing To Spread The Wealth”.
The problem, Sara writes, is that only the most popular creators are earning substantial incomes based upon existing payment methods like tipping, subscriptions, and presumably creator fund disbursements. She blames this on Clay Shirkey’s Power Law Distribution:
"In systems where many people are free to choose between many options, a small subset of the whole will get a disproportionate amount of traffic (or attention, or income), even if no members of the system actively work towards such an outcome," Shirky wrote. "This has nothing to do with moral weakness, selling out, or any other psychological explanation. The very act of choosing, spread widely enough and freely enough, creates a power law distribution."
The larger problem, in my opinion, is that creators are viewed and compensated as single entities by the platform, while the platform itself gets paid via ad revenue for its total number of monthly active users; users that are only there because of the cumulative value of the long tail of diverse creators.
This is why Duel is the only Social Video app that is a proponent of a 30-70 ad share with its creators and users. No platform deserves to keep all the ad revenue for itself when it only exists because of the creative output of its members. Duel is aiming to radically change that paradigm, but it needs your help to do it. If you support our work, please visit our WeFunder page, watch our new video, and share it with your friends. With your help, we can make social media better for everyone.