Championing universal creative income
Championing Universal Creative Income: Empowering Creators in the Digital Age
In the digital realm, user rights are akin to civic rights, and the rights of creators equate to worker rights. As we navigate the ever-changing landscape of the digital world, we are reminded of the New Deal of the 1930s—an era marked by programs and projects designed to alleviate unemployment, stimulate economic recovery, and reshape the financial system during the Great Depression. Among these initiatives was Federal Project Number One, a visionary endeavor that allocated $27 million, equivalent to approximately $522 million today, to provide gainful employment for countless artists spanning music, design, visual art, theater, writing, and more. This unparalleled government patronage of the arts not only supported artists but also aimed to democratize art, making it accessible to all while nurturing a unique American artistic style.
Federal Project Number One engaged some of the 20th century’s most celebrated artists, such as Jackson Pollock, Willem de Kooning, Lee Krasner, and Mark Rothko, yielding over 100,000 remarkable works, including murals, sculptures, and paintings.
Beyond providing relief to jobless artists, these initiatives aimed to “ameliorate growing discontent and inspire civic feeling.” (source). They played a pivotal role in reshaping the perception of art, shifting it from a luxury financed by private patrons to an integral component of democracy, accessible to the masses and intertwined with public spaces. This transformation validated the role of artists as essential contributors to both the economy and society, no longer relegated to mere hobbyists.
Fast forward nearly a century, and the need to rekindle this spirit is evident. Today’s landscape mirrors the challenges of the 1930s, marked by widespread unemployment, pervasive burnout, and a pressing need to bridge divides within our communities. The COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated income inequality to levels not witnessed since the Gilded Age, with the top 1% of Americans holding a staggering 30.4% of all household wealth.
Universal Creative Income (UCI)
In our contemporary world, creative careers often remain a privilege of the well-off. Statistics reveal that individuals hailing from households with an annual income of $1 million are ten times more likely to pursue careers in art, music, acting, or writing than those from families earning $100,000.
Kristen Bahler of Money succinctly notes that “Devoting yourself to the life of a ‘starving artist’ is a lot less risky if your family has enough money to make sure you don’t actually starve.”
This unequal landscape extends to the digital realm of content creation, where a 2013 study published in the Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication found that “online content creators tend to be from relatively privileged groups.” These creators often produce content that aligns with their own interests and experiences, potentially skewing the content landscape.
Despite the democratization of creative tools and platforms and the reduced barriers to entry in online content creation, financial success remains concentrated among a select group of top creators. The dream of a thriving middle class within the creator economy continues to elude us.
Platform-Provided UCI
In many ways, creative works on the internet resemble public goods: they are nonexcludable and nonrivalrous. When creators share videos on platforms like TikTok or post tweetstorms, the content is available for global consumption, offering entertainment, connection, knowledge, and positive externalities. However, monetizing such content is often impractical unless creators opt for paywalls, limiting access to their creations.
While government spending has traditionally been a way to provide public goods, the digital age introduces another potential source of support for creative workers: technology platforms. Tech companies often liken themselves to digital public spaces, emphasizing their role as the virtual town square. In the physical world, public spaces receive funding from local, state, and federal sources; similarly, tech platforms can fund emerging creators as a form of investment in the vitality of digital town squares.
In the digital realm, user rights equate to civic rights, and creator rights translate into worker rights. At present, creator-workers wield limited influence over their compensation, protection, and labor practices. Introducing platform-sponsored basic income for creators represents a significant stride toward creating a more worker-friendly environment. This, in turn, would enrich the content landscape, offering consumers a more diverse and engaging experience.
Platform UCI serves as a potential solution to support emerging creators. By providing creators with a basic income, we can incentivize them to dedicate more time to content creation. TikTok’s Creator Fund aligns with this approach, allocating $200 million to empower creators seeking livelihoods through innovative content.
The implementation of UCI has the potential to alleviate financial concerns, allowing individuals to focus on creative pursuits without the burden of meeting basic needs.
For tech platforms, the concept is straightforward: allocate a portion of company revenue to establish a Universal Creative Income program for emerging creators on the platform. Companies such as Facebook or YouTube could establish funds to support creators and provide them with monthly stipends to cover basic living expenses, regardless of their background or experience. UCI stands apart from conventional platform creator funds in terms of payment consistency, transparent eligibility criteria, and a focus on empowering emerging creators in dire financial need. We believe that by prioritizing creators facing the greatest financial challenges, we can make the most significant impact on participation in the creator economy.
Unlocking Value with Universal Creative Income (UCI)
While Universal Creative Income (UCI) may initially seem like an altruistic endeavor on the part of platforms, it offers substantial business advantages that can make it a strategic investment. UCI has the potential to realign incentives for both creators and platforms, ultimately driving increased user engagement and retention.
1. Attracting and Retaining Creators
Implementing a UCI program allows platforms to compete more effectively for creators’ attention. In today’s fiercely competitive landscape, platforms are continually vying for creators’ allegiance. Initiatives like the TikTok Creator Fund, promising $1 billion to US creators over three years, and Snap Spotlight, offering daily payouts of $1 million, are steps in the right direction. However, these programs often primarily benefit superstar creators. UCI can set platforms apart by attracting and retaining a more extensive pool of creators.
2. Promoting Diversity in the Creator Economy
The current creator landscape often excludeindividuals from underprivileged backgrounds, as they may be unable to take financial risks associated with unpaid content creation. By funding emerging creators, UCI can create a more diverse and inclusive creator ecosystem. Focusing on creators in dire financial need can foster loyalty among emerging creators and serve as a valuable acquisition channel for the next generation of talent. Platforms such as Pinterest are already recognizing the importance of supporting underrepresented communities through initiatives like the Creator Fund.
3. Enhancing Lifecycle Retention
Platforms can use UCI to tip the scales in their favor when creators choose where to start their content creation journey. Once creators establish themselves on a platform and build a following, they are more likely to remain loyal. Familiarity with product features and audience retention further strengthen their commitment to the platform.
4. Addressing Resentment Among Smaller Creators
Many emerging creators feel that platforms prioritize top creators, granting them preferential treatment and visibility. A platform-sponsored UCI program can counteract this perception, demonstrating that emerging creators are valued contributors to the ecosystem.
Benefits for Creators in a UCI Model
UCI doesn’t just benefit platforms; it also empowers creators in several ways:
1. Encouraging Experimentation and Creativity
Research shows that social recognition, a significant driver in the online creator economy, often leads to conformity, while financial rewards promote originality. UCI can incentivize creators to experiment and take creative risks without fear of alienating their audience or underperforming.
2. Improving Creator Wellness
Being a modern creator can be exhausting, with social media platforms favoring content velocity. UCI can help creators achieve a healthier work-life balance and mitigate burnout by alleviating financial stress.
3. Transitioning from Side Hustle to Main Hustle
For many creators, the transition from a traditional job to full-time content creation can be daunting due to initial income uncertainties. UCI can facilitate this transition, providing creators with a financial cushion as they explore their niche in the creator-market landscape.
The net result of UCI would be a more diverse pool of content creators, including those who might not have pursued content creation otherwise, leading to a higher-quality and more diverse content ecosystem. This concept aligns with Substack’s Substack Pro program, which provides advance payments to writers, fostering a sustainable enterprise and contributing to the platform’s ecosystem quality.
Risks Associated with Platform Universal Creative Income (UCI)
While the concept of Universal Creative Income (UCI) sponsored by tech platforms has its merits, it also comes with inherent risks and challenges:
1. Dependence on Platforms
Creators participating in UCI programs become increasingly reliant on a single platform for their income, giving that platform considerable power over their livelihoods. Unlike government-sponsored Universal Basic Income (UBI), which involves democratic processes, the platform UCI lacks checks and balances. The platform retains unilateral authority over payment amounts, program eligibility, and other critical aspects.
2. Potential for Stifling Innovation
While established tech giants can afford to fund UCI programs, early-stage startups may struggle to do the same. This inequality may deter emerging creators from joining startups, leading to platform consolidation and reduced innovation. Platforms may become too influential in shaping the art industry’s direction, effectively “platformizing” art and dictating the acceptance and value of certain art formats.
3. Controversy Among Top Creators
Top creators, who contribute significantly to a platform’s revenue, may object to platform-sponsored UCI programs as they effectively redistribute a share of the platform’s earnings from top earners to emerging creators. This redistribution could lead to resentment and may prompt top creators to seek alternative platforms to avoid subsidizing UCI programs, potentially taking their audiences with them.
4. Taxation and Relocation Considerations
Similar to real-world taxation, platform UCI could lead to increased take rates on top creators, potentially prompting them to move to other platforms with lower take rates to avoid subsidizing UCI. Creators may choose platforms based on taxation considerations, impacting the distribution of audiences across platforms.
It’s essential to acknowledge that UCI programs have the potential to democratize online content creation and make it more accessible as a career. While concerns exist, the implementation of platform UCI could lead to a net increase in the accessibility of online content creation.
Implementing Platform UCI
The implementation of platform UCI involves several key steps:
Determine UCI Funding and Eligibility Criteria: The platform calculates a portion of its revenue to allocate to the UCI program. It establishes eligibility criteria based on business goals, targeting creators for whom regular cash payments would have the most significant impact on content creation and engagement.
Creator Enrollment: Creators who meet the eligibility criteria can choose to enroll in the UCI program. The platform then initiates monthly payments to these creators.
Time-Limited UCI: Creators remain in the UCI program for a predetermined duration, typically 12 months. This time-bound approach ensures that emerging creators receive support without overburdening platforms with indefinite commitments.
Assessment and Iteration: Platforms continuously assess the UCI program’s results against their business objectives, such as original content creation, engagement, and retention. This evaluation informs future iterations of the program.
Crypto-Based UCI as an Alternative
In addition to platform-funded UCI, crypto-based models offer transparent and democratic funding alternatives for artists. One approach involves decentralized autonomous organizations (DAOs) selling fractionalized NFTs and using the proceeds to fund grants for emerging artists. These artists, in return, provide social tokens as collateral to the organization.
However, crypto-based UCI introduces complexities and requires creators to have crypto wallets and knowledge of cryptocurrency transactions. Onboarding and education efforts may be necessary, especially for creators from lower-income backgrounds.
From UCI to Universal Basic Income (UBI)
Expanding the concept of UCI to a broader population could have far-reaching benefits, including the promotion of Universal Basic Income (UBI). UBI can serve as a hidden form of creator funding, allowing more individuals to pursue creative and innovative endeavors. It could help bridge income disparities and enable people to be more creative and innovative without the fear of financial insecurity.
Although the idea of UBI has gained popularity, enacting such a program in the US faces significant political challenges. However, crypto-based initiatives, like those explored by UBI Research, offer potential solutions. These projects leverage blockchain technology to provide government-independent UBI to verified individuals.
Final Words
Universal Creative Income (UCI) holds the promise of fostering a healthier online creator ecosystem. While challenges exist, including platform dependence and potential innovation stifling, addressing these concerns can lead to a more inclusive and sustainable digital creative landscape. Moreover, the concept of UCI could pave the way for broader discussions about Universal Basic Income (UBI) to support not only creators but a wider segment of the population.