Summary of Key Points
This article discusses the concept of "istributing wealth among the people in the digital age," emphasizing that the internet has enabled a large number of netizens to generate economic income through secondary creation, self-media, and live-streaming sales by granting content production rights from institutions to individuals. It highlights the need for policy governance to balance content regulation with people's livelihoods, as freedom of expression is inherently linked to economic freedom, and excessive control can harm ordinary people's means of subsistence.
1. The "Household Responsibility System" in Internet Content Production: Ordinary People Can Also Become Creators
In the past, content production was monopolized by television stations, publishing houses, and other institutions, making it difficult for ordinary people to participate. However, the internet has broken this barrier. For example, AI is used to modify classic works (such as "Lin Daiyu Uprooting a Weeping Willow"), create short videos (summarizing entire movies in five minutes), or cover songs (piano versions of popular tunes on platforms like Bilibili). These examples show how ordinary people use their spare time and creativity to reprocess existing content.
Just as the "household responsibility system" in rural areas increased agricultural productivity by distributing land to farmers, the internet has empowered individuals with content production rights, leading to a richer variety of content. This has even led to the revival of old shows (such as "The Great Ming Dynasty 1566") through secondary creation. Although copyright regulations have tightened, creators have found ways around them using AI and other techniques, fostering a vibrant ecosystem. This represents a form of "household responsibility system" for information: information that is not scarce should not be controlled by a few; everyone should have the opportunity to contribute to its creation.
2. From Hobby to Livelihood: Content Creation as a Source of Income
Previously, creating content was often a hobby (such as sharing personal interests), but now many people do it for money. A recent survey shows that 51% of self-media creators aim to make a living, compared to only 28.5% who do it out of passion. For instance, some graduate students mention using their social media accounts to achieve financial independence during job interviews. Others, such as those wearing frog costumes to live-stream and ask for donations, face financial difficulties in their personal lives.
During economic downturns, content creation has become a primary source of income for many. Esports have gained recognition because they can provide a means of livelihood, and the same is true for self-media and live-streaming sales, which offer flexible employment opportunities, accommodating more people than the food delivery industry.
3. Live Streaming as a Bridge Between the Information Economy and the Real Economy
How does the information economy connect with the real economy? In the past, advertising was the main method of promotion, but now live-streaming sales have taken over. Businesses can choose different levels of influencers based on their budgets—high-end influencers for larger investments or more affordable options for smaller budgets, which is more cost-effective than competing for prime TV airtime.
For example, party members have helped poor households sell products through live streaming, and businesses opposed the ban on TikTok in the United States due to its impact on cross-border trade. These examples demonstrate that live-streaming sales not only generate income for creators but also help businesses sell products and create jobs, serving as a bridge between the two economies.
4. Policy Governance Should Not Be One-Size-Fits-All: Freedom of Expression Is Linked to Economic Freedom
When regulating content, policies should consider the underlying livelihoods affected by the restrictions. For instance, banning accounts can be equivalent to shutting down businesses and causing job losses for many creators. Excessive regulation, such as constantly updating guidelines (like daily changes in vocabulary bans), can be exhausting for creators.
Clear rules are needed, such as a progressive approach of first fining and then banning accounts, along with opportunities for appeals. Freedom of expression is a significant issue; restricting it means limiting economic freedom. Policies must balance maintaining a clean online environment with ensuring people's ability to make a living, to sustain the prosperity of the digital economy.
In Conclusion
The idea of distributing wealth among the people in the digital age means enabling billions of netizens to earn money through content creation. This is not only about cultural enrichment but also about genuine economic equality. Policy governance should be more compassionate and avoid cutting off ordinary people's opportunities for a decent life.