The other day one of the Google founders talked about the opportunities for ‘content creators’ in regards to using their You Tube service. (Of course, it’s always about the possibilities that await you IF you use this or that of a companies’ tools and products and platforms and…) And while my first reaction is to agree that the possibilities of global distribution are unparalleled, something about the way he said ‘content creators’ unnerved me. Made me want to wash my hands…or make sure I never have that on an ID tag at an event.
Content Creators…Logically I can understand that. And I ‘get it’, as the kids say…Wait. I’m too old to know what the kids say. Plus I’d just be texting this or Tweeting it if I knew. Anyway, I’m probably as likely as anyone to be defined as a content creator. Work across mediums, work across genres, work across platforms..check, check, check.
But I didn’t like to hear myself called that. And I’m not sure why.
Maybe it’s my 20th century ego. Maybe it’s delusions of grandeur. Maybe I’m just too neurotic. But maybe it’s another use of language to separate humans from what they do. To abstract it to another degree. After all, maybe a ‘content creator’ is more likely to let Google take their ‘content’ and use it to build Google’s business, while a ‘writer’ might expect to be paid by said company for that activity.
I don’t have an answer to this dilemma. Not sure I can competently recite the question. But there is something unnerving to the description and the casualness with which it is championed.
