This year’s creator economy should have been flipped by now, but it isn’t. A space where creators earn more, own more, build more, and thrive more, but instead, This year’s creator economy should have been flipped by now, but it isn’t. A space where creators earn more, own more, build more, and thrive more, but instead, 

Creators, Not Platforms: AI Must Flip the Creator Economy

2026/01/22 23:15
5 min read

This year’s creator economy should have been flipped by now, but it isn’t. A space where creators earn more, own more, build more, and thrive more, but instead, what’s presented is a leasing space and attention dependent on platforms. 

The fault here isn’t in the lack of talent, and no blame can be placed on the audience. What it is is a business model that was built to serve platforms and isolate control platform-server side rather than establishing creator sovereignty.  

But there’s hope, and the combination of the latest in artificial intelligence (AI) and Web3 ownership offers a radically pro-creator space that will flip the creator economy in 2026. It’s time for creators to reclaim their livelihood, their content, and now, the intelligence that drives their ecosystems. 

Fix the Model, Fix the Problem 

The current model is broken. The global creator economy is currently valued at over $250 billion, and expectations of reaching $480 billion by 2027 are circulating, but fewer than 5% of creators earn over $100,000 per year. This mismatch between market size and creator income is no accident.  

While the creators wait for fair earnings, the algorithms (and their associated gatekeepers) control the distribution, they erode creator earnings potential, and decimate any chance of autonomy. This is the way it currently is, and the way it has been for some time, but that can now change. 

What makes this moment different is the introduction of two new game-changing enablers: AI operating agents that run partly or wholly on user devices or decentralized nodes, and Web3 tokenized ownership.  

AI agents reduce dependency on centralized servers while the tokenized ownership model lets creators issue assets (like tokens, companion agents, and smart contracts) that fans can own, trade, monetize, and govern.  

When combined, these enablers flip the model on its head, allowing creators to own the agent, the audience to own part of the outcome, and platforms to become just infrastructure. This is the model that can fix the problem: creators who control the intelligence that interacts with their audience, as the audience shifts from passive viewing to active participation. 

Agents as Assets 

In 2026, priorities need to be reshuffled, with creators building autonomous systems that they actually own. AI companions, and agents as a whole, are not features; they’re assets. When deployed optimally, they deliver personalized interaction, continuous engagement, and value that doesn’t require platform sign-off and scheduling.  

When creators gain leverage through the acknowledgement that agents are indeed assets, the agent they control becomes a living extension of their work. Agents deployed in this way shift the positioning of power from the platform algorithm to the creator’s intention. 

The days of renting access to someone else’s intelligent infrastructure are fading fast, and tokenized ownership confirms this transition’s trajectory. A creator can link access rights, revenue share, development, and governance power directly to tokens or NFT-based companion licenses. 

Community members holding these tokenized assets gain influence, the ability to benefit from the ecosystem’s growth, and economic alignment with their ideals and needs. As the companion agent interacts, scales, and evolves, value travels through fully transparent smart contracts so anyone can audit the process publicly at any time. 

Preparing For Sovereignty  

Creators stepping out into this brave new world of sovereignty need to be prepared in advance to seize the opportunity being presented. Designing systems that simply recreate the same platform-centric dynamics will no longer be acceptable.  

Systems must be designed to reinforce autonomy, companion agents must deliver real value and functionality, and the experience needs to follow. Community stewardship, creative support, and personalized engagement will be key to extending a creator’s ecosystem and fueling their development. 

Token structures should focus on creating economies that are truly sustainable for the foreseeable future, and creators must prioritise their community’s needs. Communities must understand their influence, rights, responsibilities, and the fact that all creator ecosystems must reward participation fairly. 

Platforms wishing to remain relevant should listen closely, since their role is shifting back to just infrastructural. They need to offer on-chain governance frameworks, royalty systems with transparency, and deployment tools, all to standards that allow creators to move freely. 

The creator economy has spent years waiting for a real structural correction, the kind that AI-driven operations and Web3-native ownership models actually make possible. For a long time, creators have been stuck inside platforms that control distribution, data, and monetization, leaving little room to experiment or build lasting leverage. Now that those constraints are starting to loosen, it’s less about theory and more about speed. It’s a race to see which creators move first, test new tools, and push past the limits of the old model, while others hesitate. As this shift accelerates, the old creator economy won’t slowly evolve, it will be replaced, and the creators who adapt early will help define what comes next. 

Own the system, build the economy. Not the other way around. 

Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact [email protected] for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

HitPaw API is Integrated by Comfy for Professional Image and Video Enhancement to Global Creators

SAN FRANCISCO, Feb. 7, 2026 /PRNewswire/ — HitPaw, a leader in AI-powered visual enhancement solutions, announced Comfy, a global content creation platform, is
Share
AI Journal2026/02/08 09:15
Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

Journalist gives brutal review of Melania movie: 'Not a single person in the theater'

A Journalist gave a brutal review of the new Melania documentary, which has been criticized by those who say it won't make back the huge fees spent to make it,
Share
Rawstory2026/02/08 09:08
Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Facts Vs. Hype: Analyst Examines XRP Supply Shock Theory

Prominent analyst Cheeky Crypto (203,000 followers on YouTube) set out to verify a fast-spreading claim that XRP’s circulating supply could “vanish overnight,” and his conclusion is more nuanced than the headline suggests: nothing in the ledger disappears, but the amount of XRP that is truly liquid could be far smaller than most dashboards imply—small enough, in his view, to set the stage for an abrupt liquidity squeeze if demand spikes. XRP Supply Shock? The video opens with the host acknowledging his own skepticism—“I woke up to a rumor that XRP supply could vanish overnight. Sounds crazy, right?”—before committing to test the thesis rather than dismiss it. He frames the exercise as an attempt to reconcile a long-standing critique (“XRP’s supply is too large for high prices”) with a rival view taking hold among prominent community voices: that much of the supply counted as “circulating” is effectively unavailable to trade. His first step is a straightforward data check. Pulling public figures, he finds CoinMarketCap showing roughly 59.6 billion XRP as circulating, while XRPScan reports about 64.7 billion. The divergence prompts what becomes the video’s key methodological point: different sources count “circulating” differently. Related Reading: Analyst Sounds Major XRP Warning: Last Chance To Get In As Accumulation Balloons As he explains it, the higher on-ledger number likely includes balances that aggregators exclude or treat as restricted, most notably Ripple’s programmatic escrow. He highlights that Ripple still “holds a chunk of XRP in escrow, about 35.3 billion XRP locked up across multiple wallets, with a nominal schedule of up to 1 billion released per month and unused portions commonly re-escrowed. Those coins exist and are accounted for on-ledger, but “they aren’t actually sitting on exchanges” and are not immediately available to buyers. In his words, “for all intents and purposes, that escrow stash is effectively off of the market.” From there, the analysis moves from headline “circulating supply” to the subtler concept of effective float. Beyond escrow, he argues that large strategic holders—banks, fintechs, or other whales—may sit on material balances without supplying order books. When you strip out escrow and these non-selling stashes, he says, “the effective circulating supply… is actually way smaller than the 59 or even 64 billion figure.” He cites community estimates in the “20 or 30 billion” range for what might be truly liquid at any given moment, while emphasizing that nobody has a precise number. That effective-float framing underpins the crux of his thesis: a potential supply shock if demand accelerates faster than fresh sell-side supply appears. “Price is a dance between supply and demand,” he says; if institutional or sovereign-scale users suddenly need XRP and “the market finds that there isn’t enough XRP readily available,” order books could thin out and prices could “shoot on up, sometimes violently.” His phrase “circulating supply could collapse overnight” is presented not as a claim that tokens are destroyed or removed from the ledger, but as a market-structure scenario in which available inventory to sell dries up quickly because holders won’t part with it. How Could The XRP Supply Shock Happen? On the demand side, he anchors the hypothetical to tokenization. He points to the “very early stages of something huge in finance”—on-chain tokenization of debt, stablecoins, CBDCs and even gold—and argues the XRP Ledger aims to be “the settlement layer” for those assets.He references Ripple CTO David Schwartz’s earlier comments about an XRPL pivot toward tokenized assets and notes that an institutional research shop (Bitwise) has framed XRP as a way to play the tokenization theme. In his construction, if “trillions of dollars in value” begin settling across XRPL rails, working inventories of XRP for bridging, liquidity and settlement could rise sharply, tightening effective float. Related Reading: XRP Bearish Signal: Whales Offload $486 Million In Asset To illustrate, he offers two analogies. First, the “concert tickets” model: you think there are 100,000 tickets (100B supply), but 50,000 are held by the promoter (escrow) and 30,000 by corporate buyers (whales), leaving only 20,000 for the public; if a million people want in, prices explode. Second, a comparison to Bitcoin’s halving: while XRP has no programmatic halving, he proposes that a sudden adoption wave could function like a de facto halving of available supply—“XRP’s version of a halving could actually be the adoption event.” He also updates the narrative context that long dogged XRP. Once derided for “too much supply,” he argues the script has “totally flipped.” He cites the current cycle’s optics—“XRP is sitting above $3 with a market cap north of around $180 billion”—as evidence that raw supply counts did not cap price as tightly as critics claimed, and as a backdrop for why a scarcity narrative is gaining traction. Still, he declines to publish targets or timelines, repeatedly stressing uncertainty and risk. “I’m not a financial adviser… cryptocurrencies are highly volatile,” he reminds viewers, adding that tokenization could take off “on some other platform,” unfold more slowly than enthusiasts expect, or fail to get to “sudden shock” scale. The verdict he offers is deliberately bound. The theory that “XRP supply could vanish overnight” is imprecise on its face; the ledger will not erase coins. But after examining dashboard methodologies, escrow mechanics and the behavior of large holders, he concludes that the effective float could be meaningfully smaller than headline supply figures, and that a fast-developing tokenization use case could, under the right conditions, stress that float. “Overnight is a dramatic way to put it,” he concedes. “The change could actually be very sudden when it comes.” At press time, XRP traded at $3.0198. Featured image created with DALL.E, chart from TradingView.com
Share
NewsBTC2025/09/18 11:00