THE ISSUE WITH ‘CONTENT CREATORS’

I cannot recall, with any degree of clarity, precisely when I first heard the term ‘content creator,’ but it was likely somewhere during the rise and global dominance of Facebook. It struck me as a rather odd, unspecific term, but whatever. As time wore on and other popular social media and video-based platforms like Instagram, YouTube and TikTok began their ascension, I was hearing the term more and more frequently, and from all manner of people. Of course, as we are all well aware, the term ‘content creator’ is, nowadays, ubiquitous.

So rampant is this trend, it is patently obvious that the overuse of this term is yet another perfect example of the incessant, unerring proclivity of Americans to dumb shit down and genericise. Frankly, it’s as exhausting as it it revolting.

It is a term that, purportedly, conveys meaning when, in fact, means literally nothing at all. It amounts to nothing more than ridiculous semantic atmospherics. A contrivance to intentionally obfuscate or otherwise distort reality. In many cases, it’s a not so clever ruse to legitimize the illegitimate.

It’s ersatz; it’s bullshit.

To be clear, my issue isn’t with what’s being ‘created’ or the ‘creators’ themselves (both words can be applied extremely loosely in the majority of cases), it’s the wholesale embracing of linguistic vaguery that tends to enable one’s imagination to overshoot reality.

My issue is with the inexactitude of the language. There already exists a precise definition for whatever it is you’re doing, so why not simply apply it?

To wit, the kid who uploads sub-amateur videos of he and his buddies poorly executing skateboard stunts or recordings of their prodigious flatulence is not an auteur, he’s a fucking buffoon. He’s doing what dumb kids do, but happens to possess the ability to share it with the universe. Nevertheless, in today’s world, he’s a ‘Content Creator.’

The flip-side of this coin, is when truly creative people unwittingly dupe themselves into identifying with this term, the result being that it actually demeans both themselves and their creative endeavors. In this case the term understates reality.

To illustrate my argument, I scoured le Internet to find five, real-life examples of sundry sites run by individuals who openly refer to themselves as ‘Content Creators.’ First, I will provide a brief overview of the ‘content’ of their site. Next, we’ll conduct a bit of analysis to see if we can determine what the specific, pre-existing term/creative title is for what they are doing. In addition, we’ll examine the requisite skills, experience and education needed to ‘create’ their individual ‘content.’

Ready? Okay, let’s roll!

Example 1: Offers insight and education on cosmology and astrophysics where exceedingly complex ideas are presented in such a way that laypeople can easily understand them.

Example 2: Offers non-traditional pornographic videos, the most popular of which entails the insertion of an abnormally large, raw turkey leg into the ‘creators’ rectum. Also offers private one-on-one video sessions.

Example 3: Offers original fiction stories in print. Also includes audio narration by the ‘creator’ of both their own and other’s short fiction.

Example 4: Offers comprehensive previews, reviews, and play-throughs of board games. Also, includes board game-related news, live convention coverage and opinion.

Example 5: Offers more than 5,000 photographs (non-nude) of ‘creator,’ most of which are head-shots (aka selfies) or full-body photos wearing provocative attire in quasi-risque poses.

Alright then. As is quite evident, the general nature of ‘content’ from said ‘creators’ is extremely diverse, but, again, that’s immaterial to my argument. What is of importance is when we apply a modicum of analysis to each to see what’s really wriggling behind the curtain and determine their real creative title and what is required to produce their specific ‘content.’

Example 1:

• What this ‘Content Creator’ Really Is: An Astrophysicist
• Skills, Experience, Education Required: Highly rarefied skill-set including PhD and over a decade of experience working for NASA or like/similar organization or academic institution. Ability to present difficult to understand concepts in a clear, easy and compelling way.

Example 2:

• What this ‘Content Creator’ Really Is: A Sex Worker (Essentially an online strain of ‘the world’s oldest profession’).
• Skills, Experience, Education Required: None. Perhaps an errant lack of self-respect and copious amounts of lubricant?

Example 3:

• What this ‘Content Creator’ Really Is: A Writer. Also, an Audio Book Narrator.
• Skills, Experience, Education Required: Rarefied skill-set including the ability to write at a professional level, requiring decades of practice. Also, the ability to read and record short fiction in an engaging way.

Example 4:

• What this ‘Content Creator’ Really Is: Small Business Owner & Video Producer
• Skills, Experience, Education Required: General business acumen, video production & editing, set design, acting/presentation skills, staff management, ability to learn rules to hundreds of games of varying difficulty each year and provide meaningful analysis.

Example 5:

• What this ‘Content Creator’ Really Is: Here, I’m going with ‘Individual Intentionally Exploiting One’s Appearance for the Express Purposes of Attention and/or Financial Gain’ (as I am uncomfortable with the more common, pejorative colloquial descriptor of ‘Cam Whore’).
• Skills, Experience, Education Required: None. Perhaps a staggeringly powerful cocktail of narcissism, vanity and vapidity?

Before anyone happens to get their feathers ruffled (and, yes, I’m aware that this essay is posted here in my ‘Feather Ruffling’ category), let me state again, I’m not judging the nature or quality of what any of these individuals is doing, nor should you. I would also caution readers to avoid making any assumptions on the gender of the ‘creators’ in the above examples.

Nevertheless, Example 2 did make me want to bolt like, erm, Usain Bolt, to my nearest collegiate ‘safe space’ to chill and ‘process’ what I had witnessed. (To be candid, I have no clue what occurs in such places, however I’m reasonably certain it is not relaxing in a plush recliner reading ‘The Essential Works of Jonathan Swift.’ Likely, it’s more akin to plopping into a LoveSac with some weed and updating one’s Insta-Twit-Face-Tok account, but I digress).

As the saying goes, “You do you.” If you’re passionate about something, so long as it’s legal, by all means, go for it, irrespective of what that may happen to be. You have my unfettered support.

But do not bullshit yourself by, knowingly or unwittingly, hiding behind some ‘non-term’, because you’re certainly not bullshitting me, or anyone else for that matter.

As goes the popular Spanish phrase, “A llamar al pan pan, y vino, vino,” which translates as, “Let’s call the bread bread and the wine wine.”

NOTES AND OBSERVATIONS

For the record, all the sites above are monetized, to greater or lesser extents, using common methods such as Google AdSense, YouTube, Patreon, subscription, direct donation, affiliate marketing, merchandise, etc. My offhand speculation is that the individual ‘creators’ in Examples 2 and 5, likely generate more revenue than the the other three combined. But again, totally immaterial.

As a quintessentially sardonic, disaffected Gen X slacker, I’ve had my turn in the proverbial barrel and, admittedly, relish taking the occasional, good-nurtured potshot at Millennials and now Gen Z/iGen. However, the individuals in the examples span across all three, thus obviating the notion that the ‘content creator’ term is uniquely attributed to any one particular generation. Same with gender.

I did notice that far more individuals engaged in ‘creating’ the type of ‘content’ similar to Examples 2 & 5, had a disproportionately higher tendency to use the term. Which I find mystifying in that you’re already doing it, so what’s the reticence in also saying it? For example, isn’t being a sex worker infinitely more difficult than saying it? This supports my supposition, that the term, in these cases, is a ruse to attempt to legitimize the illegitimate.

Last, despite my diligent efforts, I was unable to find any musician or fine artist (digital or otherwise) that describes themselves as a ‘content creator.’ As a musician myself, I totally understand this as these are well established, centuries-long, notable forms of art. The individuals who create them require thousands of hours of dedication and practice. None of them would ever consider their output as ‘content.’ In fact, referring to music and fine art as ‘content’, particularly to one who creates it, is probably a great way to have your dental insurance activated.

CONCLUSION

My central point here is the crucial nature of the precision and accuracy of language. Far beyond the notion of specificity, it’s about honesty, integrity and authenticity. It’s about eschewing the overwhelming desire to glom-on to odious ‘non-words’, repugnant ‘cultural terms’ devoid of any meaning, and ridiculous catchphrases and just saying ‘what is.’ The bread is bread and the wine is wine. Period.

So, let’s agree to knock all this goddamned nonsense right off. Let’s agree to collectively abolish the absurd, non-term of ‘content creator’ and openly and honestly refer to our actual creative job titles. Whoever you are and whatever you’re doing, say it loud, say it proud and, most importantly, say it true.

Let’s have some respect for language and, in so doing, respect for ourselves.

HOW ABOUT YOU?

What’s your take on this whole ‘content creator’ thing? Do you consider yourself one or no? If so, why? As always, I’d love to hear from you!