I've been studying the algo of most the paying social apps we have (Facebook, YouTube & Twitter) and honestly 99.9% of creators (monetized & aspiring) puts a lot of work to create contents that are loved and accepted by the algorithm.
While there's nothing wrong with earning really good for your content. I also see that a lot of channels or accounts now centers their content around the "make it quick" niche.
Originally this is not a niche.
Advertisers mostly pays who has the highest attention, and since "breaking the algo" is now a hot niche. Folks who are selling these success pills are now making a lot of money in revenue..
While this looks unfair to original creators, we fail to understand that money will always follow where the attention is. This isn't a problem with web2 or web3 outlets it's a human thing.
A different monetized model with web3 will not change anything. Attention is money and money is attention and no one can change how this works.
People thinks it's content, it's not. It's the ability of a creators to pull the attention that advertisers want. With web3, it's the ability to sustain the virality that might push a platform out to the wider audience out that that aren't even interested in crypto.
I remember when folks back in the day (on Hive) would fight over someone who posted one picture and earned 100$ over them that did 1k words. They probably felt decentralized will change the model of payment.
It didn't and that's because where the attention is, is where you'd always find the money. The only way to fight or tackle this was finding a way to bring the audience to yourself.
However, attention is not easy.
This is why people do things that are bizzare. On YouTube famous creators do dangerous things to please the algorithm and attract attention. Someone would say something like "I tasted human flesh for the first time" in a video just to attract attention.
Whether it's click bait or they ate a human, the fact that that they've said something like this is what gets others interested. Have you ever wondered why bad news sells?
Newspaper outlet wants the war in the middle East to continue, they wish Trump can bomb even the UK and hope they will get firsthand information on the strike so the can sell their papers. It's better for them than saying something regular, normal or usual.
Attention doesn't care about normalcy, it cares about the relevance. It doesn't look at chaos, unfairness or how you get it, you must get it to attract the type of money you want to earn, and the fact that it can be unfair is why people actually complain.
Building a successful online presence requires chronic sacrifices. Sadly no one gets it easy. Even people who currently create bad content and still earns a lot of money made a lot of sacrifice.
Some of them has done a lot in the past, and are only currently milking the attention they currently have. For example, a lot of CEOs do nothing other than just oversea the business with their experience.
Most of the job is being done by those who are not occupying official positions, however even people who are current CEOs have worked so many years to deserve a spot or place where they barely do nothing.
This is just a similar comparison, it's not the whole thing. The point of creating and compounding is a beautiful thing.
People who are consistent, creative and dogged are the ones who eventually attain that level of attention that now qualifies them to make money. Whether it's fair or not, the system does not care, you have to make it.
You need to be relevant and you need to fair your edge of unfair advantage. It's left for you to complain or just get to work. While it's true that some people get lucky, most of the time, (most) people actually sacrifice a lot to get monetizable attention and this is just the bitter truth.
