a16z: Breaking Platform Monopolies, Using Blockchain to Fix the Broken Creator Economy
TechFlow Selected TechFlow Selected
a16z: Breaking Platform Monopolies, Using Blockchain to Fix the Broken Creator Economy
A future led by blockchain will return power to creators and users.
Navigating Web3 tides with focused insightsAuthor: Chris Dixon
Translation: TechFlow
We were supposed to be in a golden age for creators.
Today’s technologies—internet, media hosting sites, streaming platforms, social media, and smartphones—make it easier than ever to access and engage with creative work. If you want to listen to Olivia Rodrigo’s latest hit, watch Mr. Beast’s newest challenge, or enjoy the latest indie film, all it takes is a tap of your finger.
Yet, most creators still struggle to make a living from their work.
While tech platforms have helped us discover more artists—especially independent ones—only a few mainstream artists can exert real influence over these platforms. Taylor Swift single-handedly forced Apple to change its payment policy toward creators after the company failed to pay artists during free trials. When she threatened to pull her catalog from Apple, the company reversed course the next day. Swift thanked them, saying they “listened to us”—and changed their policy within 17 hours. But most other creators and smaller artists don’t have that kind of leverage or power.
This is a structural problem in the entertainment industry—and one tied to how many tech platforms operate: creators need power, and power comes from control, which in turn comes from ownership. Despite the fact that platforms couldn't exist without user-generated content, those users receive minimal profits and have no say in platform governance.
The question is how to return control to creators and fans.
The original promise of the internet was to connect people directly and eliminate intermediaries. Tech companies succeeded in connecting 5 billion people globally, but then shifted from attracting users to extracting value from them. They first lured and locked us in with convenient tools and irresistible network effects—the more people using the network, the more valuable it becomes for each user. Today, these companies hold all the power. Contrary to the original vision, the internet has become as stagnant and mediated as the era dominated by just three TV networks.
Don’t like these platforms? Sure, you can choose to leave Apple, Facebook, Instagram, Netflix, Spotify, TikTok, or X/Twitter. But you can’t take your follower list, your data, or even your social relationships and interaction history with you. Sometimes, you can’t even take your own content. As a result, these dominant social networks tightly control audiences and charge high “take rates.” Take rate refers to the portion of revenue the platform keeps rather than distributing back to participants on the network. For Instagram and X, this rate is nearly 100%. (And these terms are often not transparent.)
Worse still, CEOs of these platforms wield near-absolute power to change user rules at will. They can raise take rates anytime, remove artists and developers from the platform without compensation, and overnight alter algorithms that capture our attention—directly impacting artists’ views and plays. We’ve all seen the challenges creators face today: from Hollywood writers’ strikes over streaming residuals, to debates over who truly owns creative works (something Taylor Swift knows well), to musicians earning pennies despite thousands of streams.
How can creators finally get fair compensation? Some lawmakers suggest regulating platforms, but such regulation often increases compliance costs for smaller players, further entrenching monopolies. Last year, Taylor Swift spurred policymakers across the U.S.—from Minnesota to New York, Texas to Washington—to challenge Ticketmaster’s monopoly. Several federal legislators have also proposed laws to ensure price transparency. Yet these measures are stopgaps—they aim to mitigate harm done by platforms to artists and fans, but fail to address the root structural issues.
In the meantime, others hope platforms will reform themselves. Jack Stratton, frontman of the indie band Vulfpeck, called on Apple to “reclaim leadership in the music business.” He believes Apple could offer artists more direct fan-funding opportunities instead of relying solely on current play-based revenue models. Stratton also suggested Apple shift music revenue splits from the standard 70/30 to a more creator-friendly 90/10. It’s a good idea—but hard to implement under the current system.
Still, such changes remain temporary fixes because creators remain subject to the decisions of platform owners. What artists truly need is greater autonomy on the platforms they help build. Specifically, creators need higher revenue shares, more direct fan engagement, and the ability to leave platforms without losing connections, content, or data. Most importantly, creators should have a voice in setting platform rules to avoid sudden changes that undermine their livelihoods.
While existing platforms could become more user-friendly, this doesn’t solve the core issue: ownership. This is where emerging technologies—like crypto and blockchain—can play a transformative role. Beyond Bitcoin prices and Dogecoin memes, blockchain is not just about cryptocurrency—it’s the foundation for building a new internet, one that shifts power from corporations to communities, including fans and creators.
Blockchains are tamper-proof, permissionless networks owned and operated by communities—meaning you don’t need approval from any intermediary to run or participate in them. Users (whether creators or fans) don’t have to rely on promises from big tech platforms, because those promises are encoded directly into the technology. With blockchain, artists can earn perpetual royalties, decide how their music is remixed or used, and even allow fans deeper participation and ownership in their work. Creators and artists can reclaim control over their digital livelihoods.
With blockchain, creators can truly own their most valuable asset—their network—and thus control their own destinies. When users control their relationships, they can choose to leave a platform and move their activity elsewhere. This possibility forces platforms to stay fair. This freedom effectively reduces the take rates imposed on creators and users: for example, some blockchain-based creator platforms today charge only 1% to 2.5%. In contrast, traditional platforms like YouTube take close to 50%.
Certainly, our digital and creative world is broader, richer, and more convenient than ever before. But it comes at a significant cost: creators remain overly dependent on a handful of tech companies that hold all the power. These companies rely entirely on the people who use their apps and platforms, yet share little in terms of control, ownership, or revenue. Top-tier creators may survive, but mid- and small-scale creators struggle to grow. It’s time for a change. A future led by blockchain will return power to creators and users. Blockchain means ownership, and ownership means independence.
Join TechFlow official community to stay tuned
Telegram:https://t.me/TechFlowDaily
X (Twitter):https://x.com/TechFlowPost
X (Twitter) EN:https://x.com/BlockFlow_News
a16z
