Culture is Boring: Part 3

Social Content Prioritizes Virality (+ Profitability) Over Originality

Last time we talked about the struggles big box studios and streaming platforms are facing to capture attention, and consequently, produce original + creative content. This time we’re taking a look at the social media landscape where, on a smaller scale, content creators are experiencing a similar battle to capture audiences’ attention amidst shifting standards for engagement.

---

There’s a lot of creators out there, and therefore a lot of content. More than 50 million people around the world consider themselves “creators”, despite the creator economy only being born a decade ago. And the content they’ve created has only been increasing exponentially since then. In a recent study, it was reported that 71% of marketing agencies, brands and influencers had increased the amount of content produced and shared within the last two years. 

One pro to this — the availability of content has become increasingly diverse. There’s something for everyone, and the “long tail” of online content has expanded in such a way that there are an infinite number of niches, communities, and fringe spaces ripe for discovery and engagement. But the gap between what’s available and what’s getting attention is growing increasingly wider. While the vast expanse of content may be discoverable, it is not always being presented to users by default. With so many creators and so much content, who’s getting the most attention?

I watched a particularly thought-provoking TikTok recently by filmmaker Alex Traynor about the struggles of becoming a caretaker to an aging parent. The video garnered modest attention, but I was struck by a comment from one user: “the fact that this TikTok doesn’t have 2.1 million likes is why I don’t like people.”

Perhaps one reason why the engagement is lower: the video clocked in at over 5 minutes long. Attention spans are drastically shorter than they’ve ever been — setting the bar for engagement for creators and social platforms even higher.  But on the flip side, long-form content like Youtube videos and podcasts still have mass appeal. Perhaps it’s also about the vast expanse of content available that makes us click away if we’re not immediately riveted. With so many options at our fingertips, the opportunity cost of watching mundane content is higher.

One potential “solve” to this comes through the proliferation of so-called sludge content on TikTok, which consists of the layering of different types of media in one video — i.e. an automated British voice reading a Reddit confessional while a video of Subway Surfer plays. “Our attention span is so low we have to be distracted from the 30 second video we’re watching by another 30 second video in the video?” said one creator. For some, the abject chaos of four videos playing simultaneously is comfort by way of distraction. And there is value in that. But it raises concerns about the weird bars we are setting for what makes content “interesting.” 

Accounts dedicated to helping influencers grow engagement and follower count have rapidly spread across social platforms, as creators offer other creators the “secrets to success” bestowed upon them by representatives from the social platforms themselves. Artist Rachel Reichenbach was told after a meeting with an Instagram rep that consistency was key — four to seven Reels a week, three posts a week, and at least two stories a day. That’s not to mention all the other platforms that these creators need to stay up to date on. The advice, which Ms. Reichenbach shared in a viral blog post, was met with exasperation from many other creators. With so much emphasis on consistent high volume posting to appease the algorithm gods, there’s less time, energy + space for creative thinking. 

“The social media landscape is bleak as hell these days, and it’s designed to whittle away at your self confidence and capitalize off of that, so do your best not to let it,” tweeted one artist in response. The backlash from within this particular community raises important questions about what happens when artists and creatives are forced to be “creators” on social media in order to succeed. The metrics are different: likes and follows give an artist credibility, rather than creative talent.

With the dawn of generative AI, many creators are leaning on platforms like ChatGPT to help keep up with the pace required of them to stay relevant — getting auto-generated “viral” content ideas, posting schedules and more. It begs the question: will this desperate clawing for attention across social media actually result in any interesting content? Many creators have resorted to producing content that grabs attention by whatever means possible — gross food mashups, extreme stunts, fake arguments and artificially generated “drama” with other creators. YouTuber Trevor Jacob literally crashed his plane in a stunt for a video that he eventually admitted was purposefully orchestrated for views and likes (the video now has around 4.2M views while Jacob himself faces up to 20 years in prison).

Overall, the dynamics of the social media landscape seem to be shifting. In an attempt to claw back engagement stolen by TikTok, many apps are mimicking the platform’s FYP functionality with algorithmically driven gluts of repetitive, impersonal and cross posted content. Content often proliferates from TikTok across to other platforms, and with dozens of tools that can strip platform branding from videos, ripped off content is everywhere. Original creators rarely profit, let alone get recognized. Platforms seem to be discouraging originality by pushing certain features, audio and effects — awarding those that “play by the rules” with virality, clout and ultimately money. 

The Intelligencer’s recent article “Why Every App Now Feels Like TikTok, But Worse” describes this insipid shift: 

“The big social apps now feel increasingly the same because they’re filled with the same stuff: content their users didn’t ask for made by people they don’t know on platforms they may not even use. Where they used to see posts from people they know, now there are algorithmically suggested videos from somebody made for nobody.”

Meta, Google, Snapchat and Twitter have collectively spent hundreds of millions of dollars to fill their FYP-esque iterations with appropriate content — enticing creators with promises of increased engagement and financial incentives alongside warnings of irrelevance if they don’t comply. Snapchat paid out over $250 million to creators on its TikTok clone Spotlight. Top-ranking YouTubers were encouraged by the platform to adopt a “multiformat” approach to content creation by introducing revenue sharing to Shorts. While it certainly makes sense for these platforms to prioritize building thriving creator communities, the financial need to promote certain features and products can bump up against the need to highlight the content that people actually want to see (which is often not as monetizable).

Creators, looking to preserve their audiences and very livelihood, have no choice but to cooperate with the standards social platforms set. Despite seemingly low barriers to entry, only a small percent of creators are actually getting paid. A recent report found less than half the influencers on Instagram made money from their accounts, and those who did on average earned less than $3,000 a month. A massive Twitch hack back in 2021 revealed that the top 1% of all streamers earn more than half of all revenue on the platform.  Creator burnout has become a common cultural phenomenon, with many quitting the field altogether. And with paid verification models on the rise, there’s the potential for even more over-saturation and competition — diluting the pool and making it harder for content creators to stand out. You can now buy your way into attention rather than earning it. 

---

All in all, social content is getting boring and repetitive. The pressures are heightened and the stakes are even higher. Culture — or more likely, capitalism — is putting too much pressure on content creators to be perfect (+ profitable), which leaves out room for experimentation, fuck ups, and fun. Alex Morris from

STRAT_SCRAPS

writes:

We spend so much time trying to land the perfect concept, tone, message. Maybe there needs to be more room for novel experimentation…Can we stop trying to make things perfect and more that’s just fun?

Maybe we all need to try a little less hard to land the perfect idea, the perfect piece of content, the perfect viral video. Easier said than done, cause…capitalism.

---

Next time we’re talking about the impact generative AI may have on creativity and originality. I’m no expert on AI so I’ll be featuring some very insightful comments from a VERY special guest.

Stay tuned ;)