Nancy! You're so right! I can remember the first time I heard the words "Content Creator" and "Maker". It was when I worked at Disney and we had a meeting with the folks from Maker Studios, which was later acquired by Disney for $500 Million, natch. There was something very cringey about the language and I'm sure I rolled my eyes, but I hadn't homed in on how these words devalued art until I read your excellent post. Later, the word-du-jour for folks with popular social channels morphed into "influencer" and that one has always given me an eye twitch. I think the reason these words are so easily adopted, often by the folks making the art, is that so many of us suffer from imposter syndrome and are afraid to call ourselves "artists" or "writers" or "directors" or whatever, especially when, in our society, one is expected to profit financially from that skillset before claiming it as an identity. It took me many years to feel comfortable telling people I'm a writer. Thank you so much for this very thoughtful, wonderfully-written, and eye-opening post.
Thanks, Hilary! “Cringey” is a great word for how this sort of language feels. “Hollow” is another—stolen from the Washington Post’s Martin Baron, whose comments on “content” I stumbled on last night in an excerpt from his new book, which was published in the Atlantic. (I’m absolutely collecting quotes about this usage now, because I’m so thrilled to know I’m not alone!)
“Influencer” makes me choke, too. I hadn’t really thought about “maker,” but while it doesn’t bother me quite as much, you’re right that it’s in the same category. On top of the impostor syndrome, it feels like we’re looking for ways to simplify wide ranges of people or occupations into single words, which I understand—sometimes specifics really get cumbersome—but we’re not thinking about what we’re losing in the process, even if it’s just a sense of authenticity. All these terms feel fake to me, and in some cases a kind of bare-bones Anglo-Saxon at best, like we don’t have better words so we’re just using whatever substandard term we have…but we DO have better words! Augghh!
Btw, here’s that Marty Baron quote, because it’s just so good: ‘I had been in journalism long enough to witness some executives—unmoored by crushing pressures on circulation, advertising, and profits—abandon the foundational journalistic culture, even shunning the vocabulary we use to describe our work. Many publishers took to calling journalism “content,” a term so hollow that I sarcastically advised substituting “stuff.” Journalists were recategorized as “content producers,” top editors retitled “chief content officers.”’
Nancy - Your eloquence never fails to astound. I hadn't considered this distinction before. You made me think. Chat GPT is a content creator. Artist transcends. xo
"Chat GPT is a content creator." YEEEEESSSSSS!!! I wish I'd thought of this, because it's the perfect example of where this whole "content" situation is going. We should not be aspiring to be ChatGPT. It should be aspiring to be us, even though it never will. At best, it can only ever imitate.
Sometimes you just have to rant! It helps to know I'm in worthy company, with Emma Thompson chiming in, but this one's been percolating with me for a while. If we don't claim these terms that MEAN something and hang on to them, we're going to lose them, and lose pieces of ourselves along with them.
Wow Nancy! You have me thinking. With the time, research and personal experience I put into my work I am devaluing it by calling it content. Social media especially those that push “short form content” are scary. I lean towards supporting platforms that favor the creation of videos, articles that make room for deep discussion and analysis. I’m depending and waiting for the pendulum to swing back to it.
You’ve hit on the most insidious thing about the term—people don’t even realize they’re devaluing their work this way. It’s so frustrating, especially when we have more meaningful terms, sort of like if we started calling all colors “color” rather than saying we mean red or blue. I hope the pendulum swings back, too! 🤞🏻
Thank you, Nancy, for such a deep dive about what it means to create. Coming from the world of online business, I’ve always thought of “content” as something one creates for the sake of selling something else., i.e. a podcast, blog post, social media video, etc. whose aim is to market and sell something other than the content itself—a product, service, course, coaching, etc. In contrast, art (in any medium, including written words) is created for its own sake, whether for pure enjoyment or for selling the art (writing) itself.
Having been on both sides of this, it’s a very different energy for me to write on Substack for writing’s sake, versus the writing I did previously in my coaching business for the purpose of gaining clients. “Content,” to me, has an ulterior motive; a different energy about it. (In the case of social media influencers, the motive is to gain sponsorships, fame, whatever makes influencers their money, since—until recently—we didn’t pay to see their photos and captions).
I’m not familiar with how the term is used in other industries (i.e. corporate), since my experience is only in circles of solopreneurs and small businesses online. But to me, “content” is writing that is regurgitated, somewhat predictable, and SEO-friendly in the name of marketing a separate product or service-“The Top 10 XYZ…” In contrast, for me, “writing” is art for art’s sake (and even better if we can make a living selling it!).
Ultimately, I got fed up with writing “content” with the ulterior motive of sales, and decided I just wanted to write for fun. Now I happen to have 65 people paying to read those fun things! It’s not as easy or lucrative as “content writing” (especially if you write “content” for a big company), but it’s lightyears more fulfilling, at least for me.
You're so welcome, Liz! And I agree--"content" feels arbitrary and even artificial to me. Actually, I think "soulless" might be the best word, which--to me, at least--dovetails well with your "ulterior motive" comment.
I've looked at job postings for "content writing," but every last one of them has made me want to vomit, in no small part because it feels like the most meaningless writing ever. As Monica said above, ChatGPT is a content creator. The rest of us are something else entirely.
YES! I’ve seen how eagerly the online business coaches have embraced AI as a means to outsource this form of marketing. Luckily, writing like ours can’t be replicated by a robot (I hope…).
Yep. I totally get that impulse, because writing takes time! But if everyone's using AI to generate their writing, everyone's going to sound exactly the same. I'm hardly a marketing expert, but I'm pretty sure being different is what really gets you noticed in this world, and ChatGPT ain't gonna get you there.
Nancy! You're so right! I can remember the first time I heard the words "Content Creator" and "Maker". It was when I worked at Disney and we had a meeting with the folks from Maker Studios, which was later acquired by Disney for $500 Million, natch. There was something very cringey about the language and I'm sure I rolled my eyes, but I hadn't homed in on how these words devalued art until I read your excellent post. Later, the word-du-jour for folks with popular social channels morphed into "influencer" and that one has always given me an eye twitch. I think the reason these words are so easily adopted, often by the folks making the art, is that so many of us suffer from imposter syndrome and are afraid to call ourselves "artists" or "writers" or "directors" or whatever, especially when, in our society, one is expected to profit financially from that skillset before claiming it as an identity. It took me many years to feel comfortable telling people I'm a writer. Thank you so much for this very thoughtful, wonderfully-written, and eye-opening post.
Thanks, Hilary! “Cringey” is a great word for how this sort of language feels. “Hollow” is another—stolen from the Washington Post’s Martin Baron, whose comments on “content” I stumbled on last night in an excerpt from his new book, which was published in the Atlantic. (I’m absolutely collecting quotes about this usage now, because I’m so thrilled to know I’m not alone!)
“Influencer” makes me choke, too. I hadn’t really thought about “maker,” but while it doesn’t bother me quite as much, you’re right that it’s in the same category. On top of the impostor syndrome, it feels like we’re looking for ways to simplify wide ranges of people or occupations into single words, which I understand—sometimes specifics really get cumbersome—but we’re not thinking about what we’re losing in the process, even if it’s just a sense of authenticity. All these terms feel fake to me, and in some cases a kind of bare-bones Anglo-Saxon at best, like we don’t have better words so we’re just using whatever substandard term we have…but we DO have better words! Augghh!
Btw, here’s that Marty Baron quote, because it’s just so good: ‘I had been in journalism long enough to witness some executives—unmoored by crushing pressures on circulation, advertising, and profits—abandon the foundational journalistic culture, even shunning the vocabulary we use to describe our work. Many publishers took to calling journalism “content,” a term so hollow that I sarcastically advised substituting “stuff.” Journalists were recategorized as “content producers,” top editors retitled “chief content officers.”’
Nancy - Your eloquence never fails to astound. I hadn't considered this distinction before. You made me think. Chat GPT is a content creator. Artist transcends. xo
"Chat GPT is a content creator." YEEEEESSSSSS!!! I wish I'd thought of this, because it's the perfect example of where this whole "content" situation is going. We should not be aspiring to be ChatGPT. It should be aspiring to be us, even though it never will. At best, it can only ever imitate.
A worthy rant! Thank you, Nancy!
Sometimes you just have to rant! It helps to know I'm in worthy company, with Emma Thompson chiming in, but this one's been percolating with me for a while. If we don't claim these terms that MEAN something and hang on to them, we're going to lose them, and lose pieces of ourselves along with them.
Wow Nancy! You have me thinking. With the time, research and personal experience I put into my work I am devaluing it by calling it content. Social media especially those that push “short form content” are scary. I lean towards supporting platforms that favor the creation of videos, articles that make room for deep discussion and analysis. I’m depending and waiting for the pendulum to swing back to it.
You’ve hit on the most insidious thing about the term—people don’t even realize they’re devaluing their work this way. It’s so frustrating, especially when we have more meaningful terms, sort of like if we started calling all colors “color” rather than saying we mean red or blue. I hope the pendulum swings back, too! 🤞🏻
Thank you, Nancy, for such a deep dive about what it means to create. Coming from the world of online business, I’ve always thought of “content” as something one creates for the sake of selling something else., i.e. a podcast, blog post, social media video, etc. whose aim is to market and sell something other than the content itself—a product, service, course, coaching, etc. In contrast, art (in any medium, including written words) is created for its own sake, whether for pure enjoyment or for selling the art (writing) itself.
Having been on both sides of this, it’s a very different energy for me to write on Substack for writing’s sake, versus the writing I did previously in my coaching business for the purpose of gaining clients. “Content,” to me, has an ulterior motive; a different energy about it. (In the case of social media influencers, the motive is to gain sponsorships, fame, whatever makes influencers their money, since—until recently—we didn’t pay to see their photos and captions).
I’m not familiar with how the term is used in other industries (i.e. corporate), since my experience is only in circles of solopreneurs and small businesses online. But to me, “content” is writing that is regurgitated, somewhat predictable, and SEO-friendly in the name of marketing a separate product or service-“The Top 10 XYZ…” In contrast, for me, “writing” is art for art’s sake (and even better if we can make a living selling it!).
Ultimately, I got fed up with writing “content” with the ulterior motive of sales, and decided I just wanted to write for fun. Now I happen to have 65 people paying to read those fun things! It’s not as easy or lucrative as “content writing” (especially if you write “content” for a big company), but it’s lightyears more fulfilling, at least for me.
Thank you for starting the conversation!
You're so welcome, Liz! And I agree--"content" feels arbitrary and even artificial to me. Actually, I think "soulless" might be the best word, which--to me, at least--dovetails well with your "ulterior motive" comment.
I've looked at job postings for "content writing," but every last one of them has made me want to vomit, in no small part because it feels like the most meaningless writing ever. As Monica said above, ChatGPT is a content creator. The rest of us are something else entirely.
YES! I’ve seen how eagerly the online business coaches have embraced AI as a means to outsource this form of marketing. Luckily, writing like ours can’t be replicated by a robot (I hope…).
Yep. I totally get that impulse, because writing takes time! But if everyone's using AI to generate their writing, everyone's going to sound exactly the same. I'm hardly a marketing expert, but I'm pretty sure being different is what really gets you noticed in this world, and ChatGPT ain't gonna get you there.