top of page
Writer's pictureShe's SINGLE Magazine
5 days ago4 min read

"Rent Is Due": How the Economics of Outrage Funds Social Media Content Creators

by Riley Cook

 

The Economics of Outrage refers to the way in which media platforms, businesses, and social entities capitalize on public anger and emotional responses to controversial or provocative content. In this model, outrage becomes a resource that drives engagement, clicks, and attention, which can then be monetized through advertising, subscriptions, or increased visibility.


The creator fund on TikTok is a lucrative venture, with many creators earning anywhere from $2,000 to as much as $30,000 a month from engagement in the form of shares, comments, likes, and views. It’s no surprise that users have begun to notice a trend where content creators and influencers will do something drastic to spark outrage during specific times of the month. "Rage baiting" is not only a common marketing strategy among brands, but creators have also adopted this technique.


Ekane and Chris, Dana Dane, The Apple Store Girl, and a White Girl from Oklahoma who "happens" to let the N-word slip with a hard "ER" are all examples. Add to that the podcast clips of someone saying something outrageous about dating—perhaps a Black man saying he doesn’t date Black women because they’re "too masculine"—which many Black women will repost, share, and respond to with their own think pieces.


That creator will more than likely take the money he’s earned and then ask a Black woman on a date, treating her to the five-star restaurant she’s been wanting to visit. Social media is a stage, and the audience is there to spectate and line the performers' pockets, knowingly or unknowingly. Social media is filled with two types of people: complicit complainers and those suffering from cognitive dissonance.


Complicit complainers are those who actively engage in behaviors they know are problematic but instead of taking action to change, they vent or complain while still contributing to the issue. A good example of this is the men and women who tune into shows like Baddies on the Zeus Network and pay the subscription fee, only to then complain about the show's content.


Black women are essentially brought onto a nationally televised platform to act volatile toward one another—resulting in black eyes, swollen faces, missing teeth, and more—like caged animals on display for mass entertainment. In return, they get to fly on private jets and are paid upwards of $250,000. But is it worth it? If the stigma surrounding Black women is that they are argumentative, belligerent, and overly masculine, shows like this only further reinforce those beliefs, and yet, the show remains wildly successful, raking in millions each season.


Economic outrage within Black and Brown communities is profitable, while most positive content struggles to recoup its losses. The truth is, if it’s making money, why stop? Those who interact with rage-baiting content are well aware that the content they are consuming is negative and harmful to the community, yet they engage anyway. Then we wonder why other groups follow Black women around in beauty supply stores, refuse to allow certain Black men and women in particular spaces, or limit networking opportunities for Black and Brown men and women.


Watching your favorite content creator spit on their phone screen, fight their significant other, engage in intercourse on live, or tell Black women that lace fronts aren't classy may seem like fun and games—until those Black creators cash their checks and realize that doors still may not open for them. Meanwhile, those helping them make the money will watch their lives elevate while they remain stagnant, just destitute complainers.


Then we have the cognitive dissonates. These individuals experience discomfort because their actions contradict their beliefs or knowledge of a situation being wrong. Rather than changing their behavior, they live with the contradiction and express dissatisfaction. An example of this is someone who complains about the price of eggs being too high but instead of leading a strike, they pay $4.89 for a carton of 12 eggs, only to turn on their camera and complain.


They know it’s wrong, and that paying the inflated price signals to the merchant that the price is acceptable. These people don't differ much from complicit complainers, but the truth is, they don’t ever plan on taking any action, even something as small as traveling a bit further to find reasonably priced food elsewhere. People who consume content they know isn’t beneficial to their mental health are very much part of the problem. Not everything needs a reaction—a like, share, or comment—especially if it’s not positive and can be harmful to the community.


We know certain attire is inappropriate for certain outings, yet many women and men do it anyway because they don’t want to feel left out of what others consider a trend. At the end of the day, rent is due, and at some point during the month, your favorite content creators (or even new ones) will do or say something to get trending for a few days, raking in extra income to pay their rent or splurge for the weekend. Don’t be the fool who keeps their lights on while the one in your head is short-circuiting.

bottom of page