Creator Capitalism

If there's a creator economy, then there's creator capitalism.

Currently, the New York Times has a total circulation of 1.27 million, which seems like a significant following until you compare it to the following of any major influencer, and suddenly you realize that Instagram and TikTok have done to creating what the calculator did for engineering. They’re calling it “the creator economy.”

In the era of mass distribution, single individuals can now compete with media giants for consumer attention.

For me, the creator economy is more than just a concept that lives on my substack; it’s a hairy little beast that lives in my house and cooks my Thanksgiving dinner. Everyone knows God gives his toughest battles to his strongest soldiers. But a lesser-known fact is that God also gives his most autistic little tech bros the most popular influencers as siblings. It’s true. I have 270 followers on Instagram, but my sister has 2.4 million. So, at no credit to myself, I’ve hopped right up onto the nepotism pony and giddi-up’d my way straight to the heart of the creator economy. Proceed my analysis of creator capitalism: value analysis within an attention-driven economy. Observed through the lens of an antisocial outsider chained to it by familial obligation.

The “Influencer” vs. the “Content Creator”

I hear the term influencer and the term Content Creator are often used interchangeably when, in fact, they’re two very different roles. Content Creators produce value while influencers capture it. I find it easy to think of different economies using the analogy of fishermen and a river.

When considering a financial economy, you can think of the river as a network of financial endpoints, with the fish being money. Traditional capitalists try to set nets to catch the fish (and make money). The primary goal is to put a well-placed net to see the most fish. For example, an investor might set a net by buying Apple stock right before the release of the latest iPhone. When the new iPhone drops, all the money fish will swim to the Apple store and get caught in his net.

When considering the creator economy, the river becomes one of attention. People’s attention drifts between sources, and content creators set nets to predict and capture that attention. For example, as attention drifts between TikTok trends, influencers may develop a strategy to capture attention by consistently being early trend adopters. Alternatively, they may set a more stable net by creating a content niche, such as food or fashion, and continuously compete with other fishermen in the same area. This is sort of like day trading vs long-term investments. Trend-based creators day trade on unstable stocks, hoping one will 10x, whereas niche creators put large bets on stable stocks.

What’s important to note here is that content creators don’t inherently drive interest but rather capture it as it flows. They contribute to the social economy the same way business owners contribute to the financial economy.

Now, compare this to influencers. If content creators capture attention, influencers drive it. Most content creators are considered influencers because they use high-quality work to drive people's attention within their realm of interest, but not all are content creators. Some examples

Pure Content: Steven Spielberg, Banksy

Content + Influence: Kanye West, John Green

Pure Influence: Donald Trump, Elon Musk

One could claim Donald Trump and Elon Musk are both mega content creators (they created massive companies), but I’d argue that their influence falls entirely outside the realm of their creations. Elon Musk could sell Tesla tomorrow, and people would still follow him on Twitter.

So, if content creators are the business owners of the social economy, then influencers are the lobbyists and, in my opinion, the proper drivers.

Strong vs Weak Influence.

Now that we’ve outlined the creator vs the influencer economy, what makes someone “influential”? The audience is essential. If someone can’t reach a broad audience, their influence is limited, but the quality of the audience and the depth of engagement are equally important. To this extent, there are two types of influence: strong and weak.

Weak influence: influence over cognitively driven function. Weak influencers can sway a user’s choice between two equally viable options. They operate in parasocial region of cognition, where they viewers seek to satisfy their deep-rooted desires in the most socially acceptable way possible. Weak influence answers questions like where to eat, who to hang out with, or which brands to shop from.

Strong influence: Any influence that controls biological or deep-rooted function. Strong influence controls ideological beliefs and deep-rooted desires, such as political orientation or religious beliefs. If weak influence answers questions that can be analyzed with data, like “Which shirt is better?”, strong influence answers questions that can’t, like “What happens after we die?” “What makes a good person?” and “Should I forgive?”.

Weak influence isn’t necessarily less valuable than strong influence, especially when developing weak influence is easier. Donald Trump influences political belief (strong), but Kanye influences which shoes you buy. But if you compare the effort to payout ratio, Kanye is probably getting more bang for his buck when it comes to hours in vs dollars out. That being said, Kanye has a lower earning cap, and his weaker influencing style rendered him unable to win the election.

A great example of strong vs weak influence is the US election. Trump's campaign utilized strong influence, focusing on religion, ideology, and identity, whereas Kamalas tried to implement weak influence, focusing on higher thinking, foresight, and logic.

Gorgas Hierarchy of Influence

As a closing note, I’ll leave you with my self-defined sourceless hierarchy of influence, both social and capitol.

1. Influence of option (advertising): “You like this thing because I like this thing.”

2. Influence of perception (influencer): “You feel this way because I feel this way.”

3. Influence of desire (celebrity): “You want to be me.”

4. Influence of identity (Politicians): “You want to follow me.”

5. Influence of ideology (Religious leaders): “I am the universal truth to all.”

Thanks for reading to the base of another brain dump. I hope you enjoyed it. It's time for the Nepo Pony to nap while I contemplate Machine learning applications in determining the viscosity of amino acid sequences (are you on the edge of your seat? I certainly am)