Page Not Found

Most available metrics don’t signify what we truly value.

What would you rather have: 1,000 readers who won’t share your piece, or 10 readers who sing your praises from the top of a mountain? Or how about just one reader who’s willing to hire you?

Social media’s combination of global reach,

performance metrics, platform design, content

format, and algorithmic interference have changed

how creators make for others, and how others

perceive and interact with creators' work.

The results are an eternal presence, persistent

feedback, an unrealistic expectation of virality,

harmful social comparison, crea

Public “likes,” reactions, or retweets of others’ are “published works” of ours, too. They’re just other atoms in our public library of content. All of this content, intertwined with our identity, is viewable by an audience. And others’ perceptions of this content is considered, ultimately influencing us. The more we publish, the more opportunities

As Austin Robey and Severin Matusek put it in their report,

“After the Creator Economy”: “We want work to be financially valued without compromising our integrity. We want to make meaningful work that we're proud of, not please an algorithm. We want to share work in ways that feel right to us, not compete for attention on a feed. We want to feel see

Musicians compose their tracks with TikTok’s length in

mind, and then title them exclusively for SEO. The figure and ground have been reversed: artists don’t upload their music for distribution, they

make music for distribution.

A creator always does something to the masses: entertain, persuade, manipulate, etc. But an overwhelming amount of discourse puts the artist, content creator, or public-facing cultural contributor first. The agent. The one in control.

What’s less discussed is the other direction of this relationship: WHAT CAN AN AUDIENCE DO TO A CREATOR?

WE’RE EVOLUTIONARILY HARDWIRED FOR ACCEPTANCE. EACH “HEART” OR “VIEW” IS A CARROT,

GOVERNING OUR ACTIONS.