(2023-11-02) Marx Why Havent Internet Creators Become Superstars

W David Marx: Why haven’t internet creators become superstars? We’re a decade into online video emerging as the most powerful and popular form of mass media, and yet almost none of its stars have truly “crossed over” into mainstream success

In 1998, 76 million people tuned in to watch the final episode of Seinfeld

In 2020, there were more than a half-billion views of Bella Poarch’s “M to the B” lip-synching clip

Today she is the third most-followed individual on TikTok with 92.7 million followers, and this success landed her a recording contract with Warner Records. Bella Poarch shows us what success looks like on social media.

But would anyone say that Bella Poarch is “famous” the way that the Seinfeld gang are famous?

the most watched stars of internet platforms have yet to achieve the markers and profits of “mainstream stardom” — while a batch of non-online stars continue to do so. Zendaya and Naomi Osaka came up offline in the internet era, and this year they appeared in advertisements for Louis Vuitton. (Lame metric?)

We could easily attribute this phenomenon to hysteresis — a lingering respect for Hollywood movie stars

Even with the internet becoming the default proxy for understanding “real life,” true global stardom is still only possible after receiving validation from the movies, Top 40 radio, marquee TV shows, and international brand advertising campaigns.

This situation is a good reminder that the “mere exposure effect” — the idea that repeated exposure makes us like things — is much more complicated than pop sociology wants us to believe

We don’t trust the success on these platforms as something impressive. Social media apps don't imbue status value upon their most successful performers

Here are a few reasons why:

1. The internet is not a taste authority. The internet is inherently democratic and participatory

people look for certainty in guidance for cultural choices... editors

2. Internet stardom bestows no glamor. The democratic and teen-orientation of these platforms also means that there is no classic "glamor" in winning huge view counts. Often this is because the top content appeals to a lowest common denominator teen viewer or that creators may have relied on tricks to reach their huge numbers.

3. There is a bias towards traditional artistry. There also remains an inherent bias in favor of “artistry” within high-status circles, and internet stardom seems much more about moxie and hustle than innovative creativity.

4. Internet creators are often not ready for stardom. Many YouTube creators build their massive audiences through sociopathic stunts, and it’s not surprising when the creators turn out to be sociopathic in real life. (creator economy)