OnlyFans Ban & Creator Rights: A Needed Discussion

The Shift in Content Creation and Platform Control

OnlyFans’ recent choice to prohibit overtly sexual material is sparking a crucial, yet often disregarded, debate concerning technology firms, content regulations, and the realities of sex work.

The ramifications of this discourse extend beyond a single platform and a single community facing marginalization.

A Flawed System for Content Creators

This situation highlights a fundamentally flawed ecosystem for content creators. Platforms currently wield disproportionate influence over how creators can distribute their work and interact with their audience.

Creators are now actively seeking alternatives, diversifying their presence across numerous platforms and migrating their followers along with them.

Empowering Creators Through Decentralization

This decentralization provides creators with a valuable opportunity. They can actively participate in defining the rights they expect to be integrated into these new platforms.

• Platform Dependence: The current model fosters a reliance on centralized platforms.
• Content Ownership: Creators are seeking greater control over their content.
• Rights Definition: Decentralization allows for the establishment of creator-centric rights.

The move away from single-platform dependency is a significant step towards a more equitable and sustainable environment for digital content creation.

Ultimately, this shift could reshape the relationship between content creators and the platforms they utilize, fostering a more balanced and creator-focused landscape.

Recurring Patterns in Creator Platform Policies

The marginalization of content creators by individual platforms is a well-documented phenomenon. Comparisons are frequently drawn between OnlyFans’ recent policy adjustments and Tumblr’s 2018 decision to prohibit adult content. YouTube has similarly faced criticism, with multiple communities – notably LGBTQ+ creators – alleging algorithmic bias in its demonetization practices.

A common justification offered by these platforms, including OnlyFans, centers on the restrictions imposed by their payment processing partners. A significant early instance of this occurred in 2010 when PayPal terminated its service to WikiLeaks.

Despite the outrage sparked by each of these incidents, they highlight a systemic issue rather than isolated platform failings.

These platforms have undeniably offered creators avenues for audience development and direct fan interaction. However, they’ve also implemented policies designed to mitigate legal and reputational risks.

Policies are essential for cultivating and maintaining a secure and constructive community environment through considered guidelines. However, these should not be implemented in a way that negatively impacts or leads to the de-platforming of the creators who drive content and engagement.

The fundamental challenge lies in creators’ dependence on centralized platforms, leaving them susceptible to policy shifts and the arduous task of relocating their audiences and revenue streams.

Ultimately, this detracts from their capacity to produce impactful content, nurture their communities, and secure a stable income.

As platform control over creators has increased, a growing number are investigating decentralized, independent monetization methods that enable direct audience support.

Exploring Alternative Solutions

• Creators are seeking greater autonomy.
• Direct monetization models are gaining traction.
• Distributed systems offer increased resilience.

Shifting Power Dynamics: Decentralization and Monetization

The current trend of creators directly monetizing their work is rapidly overtaking the older system of relying on advertising and platform control. My experience at Patreon demonstrated how empowering creators with ownership and control fosters a more sustainable and equitable creator economy.

Substack has similarly equipped writers with a robust financial mechanism. Over recent years, a growing number of companies have emerged to specifically support creators in this endeavor.

However, a significant challenge remains. Many of these newer companies still depend on established systems that previously limited creators, often incorporating take rates and revenue sharing into their business models.

Consequently, the creator economy requires novel infrastructure and business approaches to facilitate the next evolution of creator-fan interactions.

The Potential of Cryptocurrency

Cryptocurrency, when implemented effectively, has the potential to redefine how creators generate revenue, connect with their audiences, and collaborate with platforms.

Its peer-to-peer architecture mirrors the direct relationship between creators and fans, enabling creators to manage their financial connections with their audience independently, rather than through large technology companies or payment processors.

Furthermore, crypto empowers creators to retain ownership and control over their brands and intellectual property.

Many crypto projects also incorporate mechanisms for community participation in project value, strategy, operations, and economics through DAOs or governance tokens.

This allows creators to actively influence the direction of projects in a manner consistent with their community engagement preferences.

Community Governance and Emerging Technologies

Creators are uniquely positioned to benefit from community-governed projects, leveraging their existing ability to motivate and engage their followers.

We are currently in the nascent stages of crypto adoption, presenting creators with a substantial opportunity to shape the future of this transformative shift.

Social tokens enable creators to mint their own cryptocurrencies, fostering a shared economy where both creators and fans can thrive and transact directly across various platforms.

NFTs have experienced a surge in popularity, yet the industry is only beginning to explore their full potential.

Creators and crypto projects are innovating ways to extend NFT functionality beyond simple collectibles, transforming them into engaging digital tools that grant fans access to exclusive benefits like video calls or AMAs.

Looking Ahead

Creators are only starting to realize the capabilities that crypto unlocks. As the user experience of crypto platforms becomes more streamlined and intuitive, its adoption will become widespread.

In the meantime, creators should proactively consider the rights they require – and are entitled to demand – from the decentralized services they utilize.

A Charter of Rights for Digital Creators

Whether operating within the cryptocurrency space or beyond, creators are now gaining the power to define their own rights. While I firmly believe creators should spearhead this discussion, the following points offer a starting point for consideration.

Fundamental Creator Rights

• Platform Independence: Over-reliance on single platforms is a core issue for many creators. Enabling creators to maintain connections with their audience across different platforms can resolve numerous problems, even those related to direct-to-fan monetization models.
• Direct Creator-Fan Funding: The recent issues surrounding OnlyFans highlight the importance of creators controlling their financial interactions with fans. Creators should have options to establish and manage these relationships independently, even if not universally feasible.
• Creator Involvement in Governance: Traditionally, platforms have offered creators limited influence over platform-wide policies and decisions. Creators deserve direct input and the ability to participate in voting on significant platform measures.
• Prioritizing Quality Content: Current platform algorithms often prioritize quantity, leading to creator burnout and rapid content production. A shift towards rewarding deeper, more engaging interactions will foster a healthier and more sustainable creator ecosystem.
• Reduced Platform Fees: Major technology platforms frequently retain a substantial portion of creator revenue. A larger share of platform income should rightfully go to creators and their supporters.
• Ownership and Revenue Participation: Large tech companies have prospered from the contributions of creators. Decentralized platforms should offer creators genuine ownership stakes or revenue-sharing opportunities, aligning interests and moving away from the current capital-labor dynamic.
• Openness and Collaboration: Creators require clear understanding of platform rules and should be included in the policy-making process. Content moderation decisions and demonetization algorithms are often unclear and applied without creator consultation; transparency regarding overall revenue distribution is also essential.
• Opportunities for Rectification: Recognizing that errors can occur, platforms should provide avenues for creators to address guideline violations and restore their content, fostering trust and collaboration.

Ultimately, it is up to creators to define their own terms – they have been excluded from this conversation for too long. However, I am optimistic that Rally and other prominent players within the Web 3.0 landscape would welcome supporting this initiative to build a creator-centric environment.

This collaborative approach will benefit both creators and their dedicated fan bases.