Social-Media Influencers Aren't Getting Rich–They're Barely Getting By

Original Article ↗ Hacker News Discussion ↗

Economic reality of influencing

  • Many compare influencing to acting, music, pro sports, gambling, startups: winner-take-all markets where a tiny elite make most of the money and the rest barely get by.
  • Commenters stress this isn’t unique: writers, chefs, gold miners, entrepreneurs show similar distributions.
  • Several point out incomes are likely power-law, not “normal”; 13% allegedly earning >$100k looks surprisingly high and may reflect a narrow or biased sample (“creator-earners,” possibly excluding those earning $0).
  • Some note these earnings are revenue, not profit; production, lifestyle, and promotion costs can be high, so true take-home may be small.

Comparisons to tech and traditional jobs

  • One thread contrasts creator economics with software jobs: both can scale to millions of users, but software work is paid reliably while art/creative work is oversupplied and many will work for free.
  • Others argue people wrongly expect creative jobs to behave like dentists or software engineers, when they are structurally more like pro sports.
  • Advice theme: get a stable trade or degree and do influencing/bands/art on the side.

Motivations, culture, and UBI

  • Several say many people will create content or art for little or no money; this contributes to oversupply.
  • Universal Basic Income is mentioned as a way to support art and cultural richness, though others worry about labor shortages and cost.
  • There’s disagreement whether this is an argument for or against UBI: some fear fewer people will do “unwanted” jobs if basic needs are covered.

Influencers vs “real” creators and ethics

  • Strong divide between seeing influencers as:
    • Just marketers/freelance advertisers whose job is to sell products and optimize engagement, vs.
    • Genuine content creators serving niche interests (tech, history, engineering, parenting, etc.).
  • Some argue “influencer” is just a pejorative for creators one dislikes; others reserve it for those paid to shill.
  • Concerns about dishonesty: bought followers, fake lifestyles (rented mansions/cars), hidden sponsorships, shilling low-quality VPNs or dubious products.
  • Some view social media and influencer culture as shallow, harmful to mental health, and built on unrealistic aspirational images.

Utility and content quality

  • Practical/tutorial content on YouTube is widely valued, though often produced as a side project or lead-gen for a main job rather than full-time influencing.
  • Multiple commenters see more money in entertainment than in directly “useful” content, aligning with broader shifts toward engagement and product-pushing over clear instruction.