I've been in this industry long enough to know when something shifts from "cool demo" to "actual infrastructure." This week was one of those weeks.

On Friday, Meta closed its acquisition of Assured Robot Intelligence, folding the startup's co-founders, Lerrel Pinto and Xiaolong Wang, into Meta Superintelligence Labs to work alongside Meta Robotics Studio on humanoid technology. The pitch, per Bloomberg, is that Meta wants to be the Android of humanoids, the foundational layer everyone else builds on top of. Mark isn't doing this because it's cute. He's doing it because Tesla, Google, and Amazon are all racing for the same prize, and Amazon already snapped up Pinto's previous company, Fauna Robotics, back in March.

Then I look across the Pacific. Japan Airlines is starting humanoid robot trials at Haneda Airport this month in partnership with GMO AI & Robotics. The hardware appears to be Unitree's, and in the demo footage, you can watch a robot slide payloads down a conveyor belt and shake a coworker's hand. The reason isn't novelty. Japan's working-age population is projected to drop 31% by 2060, and tourism keeps climbing. The labor math doesn't work without machines.

You can see this play out in real time on shows like Door3's GameShow Bot, where a humanoid robot walks up to people on the street, plays trivia games with them, holds up signs, and turns the whole interaction into short-form content built for TikTok and Instagram.

There's a whole company called Robot.com running the same playbook at scale, with a fleet of branded delivery robots and robot dogs rolling through campus sidewalks and city centers as moving billboards. Clients include AWS, Sodexo, and Grubhub. They claim 4.2 million impressions in a single month and 3,000 impressions per mile.

Their whole pitch is that a regular ad gets you reach, but a robot gets you a moment people actually stop for, film, and share. The mile becomes the media buy.

While everyone was watching humanoid hype reels, Bot Auto quietly delivered its first fully humanless commercial truckload on April 29. No safety driver. No remote operator. No in-cab observer. A 231-mile overnight haul from Houston to Hutchins, Texas, departing at 1:16 a.m. and arriving at 4:57 a.m., as FreightWaves reported. It wasn't a pilot. It was a paid delivery to a customer's loading dock.

Bot Auto isn't alone. Gatik became the first company in North America to deploy fully driverless trucks at commercial scale in January, running daily routes for Fortune 50 retailers across Texas, Arkansas, and Arizona. Aurora has tripled its driverless lane network across the Sun Belt and aims to exit 2026 with more than 200 driverless trucks in operation, per its Q4 shareholder letter. Kodiak is hauling fracking sand in the Permian Basin. Plus AI is targeting 2027.

Why I'm paying attention now

For years the conversation around AI was about chatbots and image generators. Software stuff. The kind of automation that replaces the email you didn't want to write anyway. What's happening right now is different. Physical AI, the merger of intelligence and machinery, is what Barclays calls the next frontier, with the industry potentially growing from $2 to $3 billion today to as much as $1.4 trillion by 2035.

That's the part that matters. Not whether one humanoid can fold a shirt on TikTok. Whether the underlying systems can run an airport, a warehouse, a 200-mile freight lane, a hotel housekeeping shift. And the answer, increasingly, is yes.

The analysts in the JAL story are right that these robots aren't very smart yet. Marc Einstein from Counter Research said it plainly. The dexterity gap is real. The reasoning gap is real. Human oversight is still very much in the picture. But the trajectory is what's interesting. Five years out, the picture changes.

I'm not in the doom camp. I'm also not in the "everything will be fine" camp. I'm in the camp that thinks we're underestimating how fast the labor question is shifting underneath us, and how unevenly.

Japan is leaning into humanoids because it has to. Aging population, tightening immigration policy under Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi, and METI publishing official guidelines on robotics and AI to address workforce challenges. The U.S. is leaning into autonomous trucks for a different reason. Driver shortages, hours-of-service rules, and the brutal economics of a 230-mile overnight haul that a robot can do without sleep, without overtime, and with the same precision every time.

What the creator economy taught us is that the platforms shape the behavior. Whoever builds the operating system for humanoid robots, whether that's Meta or Nvidia or someone we haven't heard of yet, will shape what work looks like in the back half of this decade. Whoever owns the autonomous freight network will shape what shipping costs and how fast your stuff arrives.

Instagram post

We spent the last fifteen years arguing about what social media did to attention. We're about to spend the next fifteen arguing about what physical AI does to labor.

The robots aren't coming. They’re already here.

In other news

Join 6K+ women in the Women’s AI Challenge.
I came together with four other female creators to share the AI skills and tricks we’ve learned and the response has been amazing to watch.

Instagram post

For 30 days, starting May 1st we are teaching women ways you can use AI for your work, life, finances and personal brand. It’s completely free, plus you can win 5k of prizes for completing the entire thing.

Sign up here: https://www.thewomencreators.com/womens-ai-challenge

Wednesday, May 13, 3:30–6 PM at The Lighthouse Campus.

I'm hosting Realities of Mental Health in the Creator Economy with Creators 4 Mental Health, in partnership with Matt Steffanina's Mad Chill and Movember.

Join us for an afternoon of honest conversation and actual tools — grounding exercises with Jordana Reim, a burnout and boundaries session with Dr. Raghu Appassani, iJustine, and Sidney Raskind in collaboration with the Creators Guild of America, and a Self-Trust Over Self-Pressure workshop with Isaiah Frizzelle. Snacks from That's It, drinks from Olipop, networking after at Gran Blanco.

Always on, always creating, at what cost. Let's actually talk about it, then do something about it.

RSVP here — approval-based, space is limited.

LA, come run with me. Saturday, May 16, 10 AM at Venice Beach.

I'm co-hosting Creator Run Club with Grace Ling and Chris Flight. Free, open to anyone in the creator economy. We run, we mingle, we move before we open our laptops.

It's powered by Creators 4 Mental Health, the nonprofit I founded to make well-being a real pillar of creator culture. We talk about burnout. Less about what we do about it. Showing up on a beach, in motion, is one of those things.

RSVP here 

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Chinese court says AI displacement is no excuse for firings

• Claude-powered AI coding agent deletes entire company database in 9 seconds — backups zapped, after Cursor tool powered by Anthropic's Claude goes rogue

• Join the new AI Agents Vibe Coding Course from Google and Kaggle

• Think Technology Australia balances trust and transparency around Claude

• US health expert says AI key to fixing New Zealand’s care bottlenecks

• Cybercriminals struggling to adopt AI in their work, research suggests

Creator Economy

• Africa’s Creative Economy To Hit $17.84bn In 2030 – Selar CEO

• Will AI Kill the Creator Economy?

• University Launches Creator Economy Minor

• American Influencer Council Names Regina Luttrell to Scholarly Creator Economy Advisory Network

• The Lighthouse: a Collective Supporting the Creator Economy

Web3 

• How Web3 Can Support European Creativity and Copyright

• What Is Web3 and Why Does It Matter?

• Ripple Exec Disappoints XRP Bulls: 'If $10,000 XRP Was Real, It Would Already Be $20'

• Bitcoin miners sell 32K BTC in Q1 2026 amid market shifts, hashrate dips

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

with Claire Uhar and Tyler Denk (CEO and Founder of Beehiiv)

The 2026 White House Correspondents' Dinner ended early on Saturday, after a man charged a security checkpoint outside the Hilton ballroom and a Secret Service officer was shot. The shift I want to look at sits underneath all of that, and it has been building for a decade.

The clearest sign of where things are headed came two years ago, in a story most people missed. In 2024, Catherine Valentine, Substack’s Head of News and Politics, reached out to the White House Correspondents’ Association about buying tables for independent journalists. The exchange was first surfaced in a thread by journalist Tara Palmeri and later reported by The Washington Post creator economy newsletter.

On the red carpet with MatPat and Stephanie Patrick

The Post reports Valentine's account that Executive Director Steve Thomma told her independent journalists "were not news, would never be news, and would never be invited to the dinner." Thomma denied saying that after publication.

Substack responded by starting its own party, framed on the invitation as “the alternative to the WHCA dinner.”

This year, Substack’s New Media Party returned for year two at the Renwick Gallery. This time, it wasn’t alone.

Instagram post

For most of the past century, the WHCA performed three functions at once. It decided who got a seat in the briefing room. It hosted the dinner that conferred social legitimacy on those reporters. And it stood, at least in theory, as a collective backstop when administrations pushed back on coverage.

This year, all three of those functions came apart in plain view.

In February 2025, the Trump administration announced that the White House press team, not the WHCA, would manage the press pool. That ended a century-old norm. At the same time, according to Pew Research, 21% of US adults began regularly getting their news from social media influencers, climbing to 37% among adults under 30.

Earlier this year, the administration invited podcasters and influencers to join traditional media in the press briefing room. But most of those creators have never set foot in a briefing room and don’t need to. They’re credentialed by their audience.

And in moments like this weekend, you could feel another shift in real time.

It wasn’t just about who had access, but who people trusted. Coverage from inside the main WHCD didn’t automatically carry more weight. In some cases, the perception of independence made voices outside of it more trusted.

This year, the White House Correspondents’ Association dinner sold out, but it also faced real competition in the days leading up to it.

YouTube hosted a few hundred guests, from creators including me, Johnny Harris and MatPat, to legacy journalists at the Meridian International for its “Democracy at 250” event with C-SPAN. The following evening, it held a reception for news and politics creators at Floreria Atlántico, alongside a growing number of creator-journalist gatherings across the weekend, according to The Washington Post.

Beehiiv (the newsletter platform I use here) made its WHCD debut, co-hosting A Celebration of Journalism with Shinola in Logan Circle. Grindr threw its first-ever WHCD weekend party at a historic $9 million Georgetown estate, quickly becoming one of the most in-demand invites after coverage from Vanity Fair. Even TMZ has officially debuted in DC with an entire team now based there, underscoring how far the definition of “political media” has expanded.

And it wasn’t just them. According to Axios, nine events this year were hosted by media startups under a decade old, including Punchbowl News, Semafor, Puck, Status, NOTUS, and Crooked Media.

Legitimacy is no longer defined by a single institution.

Platforms are starting to replace parts of the infrastructure that once belonged exclusively to newsrooms. Substack runs a program called Defender that covers up to $1 million in legal fees for creators facing defamation suits, harassment, or cease-and-desist letters from powerful entities. Beehiiv, is positioning newsletters as a serious media category, placing creator publishing in the same prestige conversations as legacy journalism.

Here’s what that means.

For creators, the infrastructure to operate as a press is now real. Five years ago, the protections that made independent journalism viable came from a masthead. Today, some of them come from a platform’s terms of service. That trade-off has costs and benefits, but it exists.

For institutional outlets, the talent pipeline runs both directions. The Washington Post's most-watched TikTok creator left and built a new outlet whose YouTube views quickly surpassed his former employer’s.

Legacy figures like Don Lemon are now making that same shift, moving outside traditional institutions and into the creator-driven media ecosystem.

The flow of prestige is no longer one-way.

I felt this shift firsthand while interviewing Jim Acosta at the YouTube event. If you had told me 15 years ago that a CNN anchor would go independent, launch his own channel and tell me I was smart to start early, I would’ve been blown away.

The dinner will be rescheduled. The redistribution underneath it will not.

In other news

In response to backlash around actress Reese Witherspoon encouraging women to learn AI, I came together with 4 other women for The Women’s AI Challenge.

Instagram post

For 30 days, starting May 1st we are teaching women ways you can use AI for your work, life, finances and personal brand. It’s completely free, plus you can win 5k of prizes for completing the entire thing.

Sign up here: https://www.thewomencreators.com/womens-ai-challenge

Where to find me next…

Friday, May 1

I’m kicking off Mental Health Awareness Month with Hollywood & Mind at UTA in Los Angeles, moderating their social media forum on behalf of Creators 4 Mental Health. More info HERE

ChatGPT gives you generic answers because you give it generic prompts.

You know the fix: longer prompts, more context, clearer constraints. But typing all that takes five minutes per prompt, so you shortcut it. Every time.

Wispr Flow lets you speak your prompts instead of typing them. Talk through your thinking naturally — include context, constraints, examples — and get clean text ready to paste. No filler words. No cleanup.

Works inside ChatGPT, Claude, Cursor, Windsurf, and every other AI tool. System-level, so there's nothing to install per app. Tap and talk.

Millions of users worldwide. Teams at OpenAI, Vercel, and Clay use Flow daily. Free on Mac, Windows, and iPhone.

Try Wispr Flow free

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• 2 Millionaire-Maker Artificial Intelligence (AI) Stocks to Buy and Hold

• Introducing Claude Design by Anthropic Labs

• Thousands of CEOs admit AI had no impact on employment or productivity—and it has economists resurrecting a paradox from 40 years ago

• Meta to cut one in 10 jobs after spending billions on AI

• OpenAI releases GPT-5.5, bringing company one step closer to an AI ‘super app’

Creator Economy

• Will AI Kill the Creator Economy?

• The Rise of the U.S. Creator Economy: From Side Hustles to Digital Empires

• Creator Economy Summit

• How The Financial Times is betting on personality-led vodcasts as its next subscription lever

• American Influencer Council Launches the Academic Advisory Circle, Establishing First Scholarly Network Dedicated to the U.S. Creator Economy

Web3 

• Running out of time on Clarity: State of Crypto

• Trump family crypto firm sued over alleged 'extortion'

• ‘F--k this coin’: Trump set to attend memecoin conference after 96 percent wipeout

• Scoop: GOP called Howard Lutnick to reverse crypto PAC's Texas move

• ‘Everyone Is Lying to You for Money’ Review: Ben McKenzie’s Knife-Sharp Documentary Takedown of Cryptocurrency

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

Stop Drowning In AI Information Overload

Your inbox is flooded with newsletters. Your feed is chaos. Somewhere in that noise are the insights that could transform your work—but who has time to find them?

The Deep View solves this. We read everything, analyze what matters, and deliver only the intelligence you need. No duplicate stories, no filler content, no wasted time. Just the essential AI developments that impact your industry, explained clearly and concisely.

Replace hours of scattered reading with five focused minutes. While others scramble to keep up, you'll stay ahead of developments that matter. 600,000+ professionals at top companies have already made this switch.

Join them today, for free.

There's a band from Quebec (my home province, btw- I’m from Montreal) that literally named themselves after a heart condition and decided to perform in papier-mâché alien masks and polka-dot suits. And somehow, they're the most viral act on Spotify right now.

Angine de Poitrine found its way into my feed recently, and with so many debates about AI and the future of creativity, I thought this would be a fun and interesting story to cover this week.

Instagram post

Khn de Poitrine and Klek de Poitrine are a Québécois duo from Saguenay, formed in 2019, who play microtonal math rock in oversized papier-mâché masks and black-and-white polka-dot costumes. 

Their KEXP live session hit over 10 million views and counting, and even Dave Grohl is apparently a fan. Their second album, Vol. II, just dropped in April, and they describe themselves as "space-time voyagers" forming a "mantra-rock, Dadaist, Pythagorean-Cubist orchestra."

I genuinely cannot make this up.

AI music generation has reached an unsettling level of competence. Platforms like Suno now have over 100 million creators and can generate complete, polished songs from a text prompt in under a minute, supporting over 1,200 musical styles. The output is, frankly, pretty good. Good enough that background music, content audio, and demo tracks are increasingly AI-generated. 

As some of us are embracing generative A, the result may feel like our collective culture is becoming more uniform and conformed.

And while they weren’t trying to make a statement about AI, at first, many are taking it in that direction. 

They actually started the band as a joke. The two musicians were booked to perform twice in one week at the same local venue in Saguenay, so they put on masks and polka-dot costumes for the second show as a gag. But the craft underneath was anything but. Khn plays a custom double-necked hybrid guitar and bass, each fitted with additional microtonal frets, built to access notes that sit in the spaces between the 12 steps Western music uses, the quarter tones and third tones standard in Indian, Arabic, Turkish, and Indonesian traditions but almost unheard of in Western rock. 

Their weirdness and unpredictability, not only in their alien costumes but in their sound, are so fundamentally human that no current AI could possibly replicate their music.

In the ever-growing flood of AI-generated content, Angine de Poitrine's music represents a scream of humanity, a deep thumbprint pressed into the sound by its creators. The appeal isn't despite the difficulty and weirdness. It's because of it. The difficulty is the proof of authenticity.

Northeastern professor James Gutierrez confirmed it when someone actually tried. Even prompting a model like Suno to create a song based on Angine de Poitrine resulted in something far less adventurous, a kind of generic progressive rock that missed the entire point. Angine de Poitrine has become, as Gutierrez put it, the poster child for music that is "at its face value deeply human."

The virality itself is worth understanding for anyone in the creator space. These two have been making music for years, but what people are seeing now isn't overnight success. It's the moment years of work finally became visible, during a time many say is hard to break through.  

Their 2024 debut Vol. 1 became the most sought-after record on Discogs in recent weeks, with used copies reportedly selling for around $600.

Their single "Fabienk" is now topping Spotify's Viral 50 Global chart, ranking highly in the U.S., France, Spain, Chile, and Australia. They're set to open for Jack White in Toronto this July, with their first U.S. tour dates landing in September.

The lesson here isn't "go wear a weird mask." When the average is freely available, the only differentiating positions are the extraordinary and the deeply personal. Audiences are actively hungry for proof that humans are still behind the music.

Angine de Poitrine didn't set out to be the antidote to AI music. They set out to be ridiculous. And right now, ridiculous and real is exactly what we need.

Find me at NAB Show this week in Las Vegas…

I’ll be speaking with fellow NAB Creator Council Members on the association’s new VIP Creator Program and more tips for thriving in 2026.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• More than 640 students have been targeted by AI nudifiers across 28 countries

• Amplitude Research Reveals a Generational AI Trust Gap is Costing Australian Businesses

• New ways to create personalized images in the Gemini app

• Trump's AI image of himself as Jesus-like figure follows feud with Pope Leo

• Toyota Unveils CUE7, a Basketball-Shooting Robot Powered by AI Vision

• Mark Zuckerberg Is Training an AI Version of Himself to Talk to His Own Employees

Creator Economy

• Creator Economy is Rewiring $117B in Social Ad Spend

• NAB Show 2026 begins with focus on AI, streaming and creator economy

• From brand deals to brand equity: The next evolution of the creator economy

• Facing A.I. Slop and Shifting Algorithms, Brands Bet on Streamers to Stay Real

• Expanded Creator Lab Seeds Digital Synergies

• South Korea Has Sentenced American YouTuber to Six Months in Jail

Web3 

• Web3 VCs have a differentiation problem

• What Is Web3 and Why Does It Matter?

• Web3 hosting backbone Vercel confirms breach as supposed hacker demands $2 million ransom

• One of the most prominent investors in the Trump family's crypto company is now criticizing it

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

The fact that TheWrap hosted a whole creator-Hollywood summit last week tells you everything you need to know about how legacy media is starting to view this space.

The inaugural Creators x Hollywood Summit brought together creators, studio executives, brand partners, and entertainment leaders at Whalar's The Lighthouse in Venice Beach. The whole premise was simple but loaded: the lines between the creator world and traditional Hollywood aren't just blurring. They're basically gone.

I got to moderate the closing panel, "Creators as Storytellers," with three people I genuinely admire. Andrew Bachelor (King Bach), who's been building his brand since 2012 and has a slate of films including Violent Night 2, Roadhouse 2, and Paramount+'s comedy series Hate the Player. Josh Richards, entrepreneur and cultural architect behind CrossCheck Studios, 42 million followers strong, Forbes 30 Under 30, and fresh off a first-look deal with Prime Video. And Michelle Khare, creator and host of Challenge Accepted, who made history by successfully petitioning to join the Primetime Emmy ballot for Outstanding Hosted Nonfiction Series.

Oh, and she recreated a Tom Cruise Mission: Impossible stunt with a foreign military aircraft. No big deal.

Instagram post

Each of them came to the creator space with a totally different origin story. For Bach, filmmaking was always the goal. Social media was just the vehicle. Josh built an audience before he even realized what it meant. For Michelle, YouTube became the place to make things that could rival studio-level content and reach people for free.

Michelle raised something that reframed the whole conversation around what success actually looks like. "There are plenty of pieces of content, movies, art, in general, that are seen by millions and millions of people, but they don't actually impact or leave the person changed." She's not building to views. She's building to impact. And at the forefront of her storytelling, she said, is not just structure or beats but how the viewer will experience their own story arc while watching.

Josh talked about how his sketch show, Read the Room, goes through a full writer's room process, six months of writing, location scouts, casting, the whole thing. One year start to finish for a season. But every sketch also lives as its own TikTok. He's building for both worlds simultaneously, and the reaction he's always chasing is "wait, what show is this from?"

Bach has a different approach entirely. He has so much archived content that he can repurpose videos from a year ago and keep posting consistently while he's deep in production on a film. Self-syndication at its best.

Instagram post

On AI, all three were measured. Bach said it's not where it needs to be for scripted content yet. He uses it for budget breakdowns. Josh echoed that. A tool, not the whole toolbox. Michelle pointed to Survivor as her north star. That show has been on for 26 years, and no technology has ever disrupted its core because at its core it is just humans, raw and unscripted, trying to survive. That nucleus doesn't change.

The summit itself felt like proof of everything we've been saying in this space. Creators are not a side bet for studios anymore. They're the main conversation. Amazon, Paramount, and Prime Video are all in the room. The coaching still happens, as Josh put it, but the trust is building.

And if you're following me on social media in real time, I’m currently in in Lisbon, Portugal for the first StreamTV Show Europe and moderating a Leaders' Roundtable called: "The Creator Crossover: Who Owns the Next Gen of TV?" alongside Scott Brown (CEO, Second Rodeo), Tim Shey (Board Chair, Electrify Video Partners), Mel Tsiaprazis (Founder & CEO, GYST), and Ben Odell (CEO & Co-founder, 3Pas Studios).

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Project Glasswing: Securing critical software for the AI era

• It’s finally happened: I’m now worried about AI. And consulting ChatGPT did nothing to allay my fears | Emma Brockes

• OpenClaw: What China's frenzy says about its AI ambition

• In Japan, the robot isn’t coming for your job; it’s filling the one nobody wants

• The Big Bang: A.I. Has Created a Code Overload

• The Pro-Iran Meme Machine Trolling Trump With AI Lego Cartoons

• Anthropic's Mythos AI can spot weaknesses in almost every computer on earth. Uh-oh.

• OpenAI proposes new AI doom scenario

Creator Economy

• Monetizing creativity — how Saudi Arabia is building a scalable creator economy

• Virtual Dubai and the Creator Economy: Inside the Hotels Shaping Social Influence

• This TikTok vigilante is calling out what he says are obnoxious influencers — and getting legal threats

• Dubai Virtual Travel Boom Fuels Creator Economy and Reinvents Global Tourism Experiences

• Forget Follower Count. The New Currency for Creators Is Community Trust

Web3 

• Three Things Web3 Games Get Right in April 2026

• Web3’s Biggest Win May Be Becoming Invisible

• Avilom Isn’t Chasing the Future of Web3—It’s Rewriting the Rules Behind It

• Matterhorn and ASI Alliance launch vibecoding for Web3

• TRON Announced as Title Sponsor for Hong Kong Web3 Festival 2026

• The crypto honeymoon is over for now as analysts warn of a major first-quarter profit squeeze

• Iran demands crypto fees for ships passing Hormuz during ceasefire

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

We need to talk about TBPN's reported acquisition by OpenAI.

I have thoughts, especially as someone who has founded and continues to run a media and creator business, What's Trending, for 15+ years.

TBPN was founded in October 2024 and has been broadcasting live for three hours daily on weekdays since March 2025. Hosted by former tech founders John Coogan and Jordi Hays, it has quickly become a go-to space in Silicon Valley where power players speak candidly and get questioned by insiders. The New York Times called it "Silicon Valley's newest obsession."

Someone recently posted TBPN's sponsor list, and it got me thinking about the model behind this. Sponsors include fintech companies Ramp and Plaid, Google's Gemini division, and a partnership with the New York Stock Exchange.

Twitter tweet

Even accounting for a niche, high-value audience, getting to a projected $30M in year two off about 70K viewers per episode across platforms is unique.

For context, that is roughly $2.5M per month. Year one was reportedly about $5 million in advertising revenue, and the company was profitable with no outside investors prior to the OpenAI deal.

I have also heard that some of these sponsors may be spending up to about $1M per year. I have worked with and spoken to many of these companies, and even in niche, high-access media, I have not typically seen deals at that level. If that is where things are landing, kudos to them, and maybe it’s time we all start pricing accordingly.

But that is not really the point. I don’t think this deal was about current viewership or self-reported revenue.

Some, like Kara Swisher, argue this is less about the future of media and more about marketing and owning the narrative.

Kara Swisher (@karaswisher) on Threads

Not sure why the regular media is pretending that this is anything other than a lede generation and marketing scheme. It’s happened over and over in SV. We got tired covering it back in the day, but here it is again in new bro clothing. It will fade when the moguls get tired of their latest toothless jesters.

Threads

This is true. HubSpot acquired The Hustle for the same reason. Rather than build an audience from scratch, you buy a trusted brand and a direct line to the people who matter most to your business. The Hustle was reaching founders, growth people, and investors at tech startups, an audience HubSpot wanted but wasn't yet reaching, and they were acquiring subscribers for less than $2 each. The math made sense then. The same logic applies here, just at a different scale and with higher stakes.

Strategically, I understand why a company like OpenAI would make this same kind of move. OpenAI occupies a strange position in public life. It is simultaneously a research lab, a consumer product company, a regulatory target, and arguably a geopolitical actor. Standard PR firms are not equipped for that kind of complexity. As Fidji Simo, the CEO of Applications at Open AI put it, "the standard communications playbook just doesn't apply to us."

But this feels less about current media revenue and more about momentum, positioning, and belief in the founders within the AI ecosystem. Coogan and Sam Altman share more than ten years of history. Altman funded Coogan's first company in 2013 and was active as YC president when Coogan took his second startup through the accelerator. That's not an acquisition. That's a relationship becoming more official.

It also raises a broader question about how AI companies communicate in a policy-heavy environment. As lawmakers and regulators increasingly engage through podcasts and creator-led media, owning a platform like this could have implications beyond marketing.

The hot takes, besides Kara’s, have been flying. CNBC called it OpenAI "chasing vibes," while The Information's Jessica Lessin framed it plainly, saying Elon Musk "has X," and now Sam Altman "has TBPN." Fortune pointed out something worth noting. OpenAI's chief communications officer role has been vacant since earlier this year, and the acquisition was internally championed by Simo, who has been overseeing its communications department. So yes, this is partly a hiring strategy dressed up as a media deal.

CNN drew a longer historical line, noting that this pattern goes back a hundred years, to 1926, when RCA created NBC in part to sell radios. OpenAI's chief global affairs officer Chris Lehane, himself cited Westinghouse owning CBS and Microsoft partnering with NBC to launch MSNBC as precedents. The playbook isn't new. The medium is.

As for what comes next, Lehane told CNN that having TBPN's marketing and communications skills in-house will help "as we build out some of our own franchises and our own channels," which suggests this is just the first move in something larger. The deal also saves the founders from the pressures of running an advertising-dependent business, and notably, TBPN's ad revenue model is being wound down under OpenAI's ownership.

For me, this is one of those moments that feels both validating and frustrating.

I have pitched this exact model to multiple AI companies over the past two years for What’s Trending, as both a marketing and media division, and an R&D layer to create and test new tools.

I have been through diligence and told I did not have enough scale, despite a larger cross-platform reach, consistent viewership, and a strong track record of brand partnerships and network relationships. Or that the brand relies too heavily on me.

I would be remiss not to point out that there are also broader dynamics at play here around who gets backed, believed, and accelerated in this space.

We have been building since 2011, so no, it does not look like a brand-new daily show with momentum behind it.

That is exactly why it matters.

It is interesting what gets framed as scalable versus personality-led, and how much weight gets put on momentum versus track record. TBPN had an 11-person team and a YouTube channel with around 58,000 subscribers. On paper, that does not scream “must-have acquisition.” But OpenAI didn't buy ad revenue. It bought a voice Silicon Valley actually trusts. It's the quality of their audience versus the quantity and that distinction is one legacy media companies have been slow to accept and platforms have been slow to reward.

What this also signals is a broader shift that anyone in media, podcasting, or creator businesses should be paying close attention to. Larry Ellison is reportedly looking to buy CNN and merge it with CBS News while owning a piece of TikTok, and JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon is toying with launching a media venture.

Tech and finance money is moving into media not to build journalism, but to own the conversation.

Rather than renting attention through paid channels, companies are investing in media properties that own it. The HubSpot media network, now including The Hustle, My First Million, and Starter Story, is one of the clearest proof points that this model works at scale.

The question for independent creators and media brands is what this means for those still building on the outside.

If the most valuable asset is a trusted audience in a specific niche, and tech companies are increasingly willing to pay for that access, then many of us are sitting on more leverage than we are pricing for.

And if you are a funded AI company looking to think big and build with a pioneering female founder in media and the creator economy, let’s talk.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Got $1,000? This Agentic AI Growth Stock Is Down 87% From Its Highs

• Gemma 4: Byte for byte, the most capable open models

• How business schools can turn AI from ‘threat’ to ‘sustainability enabler’

• I Built AI Employees From OpenClaw — Then Needed a Human-Only Slack

• Texting a stranger is better for reducing loneliness than an AI chatbot, study finds

• AI can make cyberattacks faster and smarter

• To Build Stronger AI, We Need To Better Understand The Human Brain

Creator Economy

• Roblox Robux: The In-Game Currency Powering a Booming Metaverse Economy for North American Investors

• How to Make Money as a Creator Without Depending on Social Media Algorithms

• Why The Creator Economy’s Future Is About Unifying Social, Brand And Talent

• Cannes Market Grows ‘AI For Talent Summit’ & Launches Creator Economy Meeting As It Bolsters Innovation Strand

• What SXSW 2026 revealed about the creator economy’s future

Web3 

• Blockchain and Web3 Projects Keep Building in Silence — Kooc Media Gives Them a Voice

• Web3 Gaming Funding Surges 94% as Industry Matures

• AI is breaking crypto security by making hacks cheaper and easier, Ledger CTO warns

• A Crypto Coin Is Gobbling Up U.S. Treasuries

• Hackers steal $280mn from decentralised finance crypto exchange Drift

/

/

/

I was reacting like I’m in high school
when I’m actually doing my PhD.

Know your level.
Don’t downshift for a trigger.

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

The AI Doc: Or How I Became an Apocaloptimist is in theaters now

I went to a movie theater to watch an AI documentary, which, I'll be honest, felt a little ironic.

Like, this is the thing I needed to leave my house for?

And when I say "movie theater," I mean... There were basically three of us in there. My plus one and I, and one other person. For a documentary trying to make sense of something shaping everyone's future, that felt a little telling.

I'm really curious what happens when it hits streaming. That's probably where it finds its actual audience.

The film is co-directed by Daniel Roher and Charlie Tyrell, and it follows Daniel right as he's about to have a baby, trying to understand what kind of world he's bringing a child into. Instead of pretending to have answers, he leans into the not-knowing, which was honestly refreshing.

One thing I didn't expect and really liked: how self-aware and overtly "made by humans" the whole thing feels. You see the sets. You see the edges. It doesn't try to hide how it's made. And throughout, there are these drawings from Daniel, very physical, tactile moments where you can feel the human effort behind it. It's produced by the Academy Award-winning team behind Everything Everywhere All at Once, and you can feel that in the tone. That same mix of chaos, creativity, and intention.

The doc moves through a few different emotional phases. It starts with wait, what even is this? Then drifts into okay, this could be really bad, like end-of-the-human-race doom and gloom. Then you hear the optimistic takes, including Peter Diamandis, founder of XPRIZE. And then you kind of land somewhere in the middle, still not totally sure what to do with it.

There's a section comparing AI to nuclear warfare, which sounds dramatic. But the thing they're missing in that analogy is that nuclear weapons are expensive and controlled. This isn't. AI is already in everyone's hands, which makes it harder to define and harder to contain.

They talk to a range of people building and thinking about this space, including CEOs of some of the biggest companies, though notably without voices like Mark Zuckerberg or Elon Musk. Tristan Harris from the Center for Humane Technology, who you might recognize from The Social Dilemma, is in there. His signature heaviness definitely comes through. At one point, when asked if he would have a child, his answer is no, and that kids today might not even make it to their teenage years.

Not exactly uplifting.

And then you have someone like Sam Altman, who's openly excited about having a child. What stood out to me wasn't any big definitive statement from him. It was more the feeling underneath it. Like, even at that level, there isn't a clean, confident answer about where any of this is going. That's kind of frightening too.

I was engaged. It was thoughtful. But I also had this moment of... this took a few years to make. He talked to everyone, followed every angle, and there's still no answer. Which isn't a knock on the film. That's kind of the point.

We're all waiting for someone to tell us exactly what this is going to be. And the reality is, no one really can.

The film does point to some clear needs: independent oversight that isn't tied to the same incentives as the companies building this, real accountability for when things go wrong, actual safety standards instead of moving fast and fixing it later.

And then there's the less comfortable part. Us. How we adapt, how we use these tools, and how we keep evolving our own thinking instead of outsourcing it.

There's also this thread throughout the doc that pulls in footage of protests and walkouts from the past, a reminder that real shifts have always come from people deciding something needed to change. Which makes all of this feel a little less abstract and a little more immediate.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI fears hit cybersecurity stocks

• Kevin O'Leary says he made an 'AI Kevin' — and that his wife soon won't be able to tell the difference

• Make the switch: Bring your AI memories and chat history to Gemini

• TurboQuant: Redefining AI efficiency with extreme compression

• Number of AI chatbots ignoring human instructions increasing, study says | AI (artificial intelligence)

Creator Economy

• Hypeo AI Bets On Formalization Gap In MENA Creator Economy With All-in-One Platform

• AI influencer discovery tools are changing how agencies cast creators

• Finally, an IMDb for the Creator Economy: Mosaic and the CGA Rider Are Professionalizing Creator Work

• Stan Founder John Hu Says Every Creator Is Already an Entrepreneur

Web3 

• Ethereum Funds Shed $222 Million as Crypto Bill Fears Rattle Investors

• Binance Employees Find $1.7 Billion in Crypto Was Sent to Iranian Entities

• ETH Denver 2026 Opens With Builder Energy Despite Crypto Slump

• Hong Kong Web3 Carnival Recap

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

The Trump administration released its long-awaited national AI policy framework on Friday, and if Congress follows through, it could change how artificial intelligence is governed across the entire country.

The framework, released March 20, urges Congress to adopt a federally unified, innovation-oriented approach centered on preempting state AI laws and taking a "light-touch" regulatory stance. Think of it as Washington trying to be the one voice in the room before 50 states all start talking at once.

The blueprint outlines six guiding principles: protecting children and empowering parents, safeguarding American communities, respecting intellectual property rights, preventing censorship and protecting free speech, enabling innovation and ensuring American AI dominance, and educating Americans and developing an AI-ready workforce.

On kids' safety, the framework calls on Congress to require AI platforms likely to be accessed by minors to implement features that reduce risks of sexual exploitation and self-harm, and to give parents tools to manage children's privacy, screen time, and content exposure.

On energy, a topic that has been simmering for months, the White House is pushing to codify a pledge signed by companies including Amazon, Google and OpenAI requiring tech firms to supply or pay for the electricity used by the data centers they operate. It also calls on Congress to streamline permitting so data centers can generate power on site.

For creators and publishers, the framework tries to thread a needle. It recommends that Congress protect creators' voices and likenesses, while also maintaining that AI scraping the internet for copyrighted material does not violate U.S. copyright law, leaving the courts to make the final call on fair use.

Notably, parts of this are already starting to take shape. The Take It Down Act, signed into law in 2025, created the first federal requirement for platforms to remove non-consensual AI-generated content. Meanwhile, proposals like the NO FAKES Act, the DEFIANCE Act, and the CLEAR Act signal growing bipartisan momentum to address voice, likeness, accountability, and transparency in the age of AI.

This is where the real divide starts to show. The administration says states should not be permitted to regulate AI development, should not penalize AI developers for a third party's unlawful conduct using their product, and should not unduly burden Americans' use of AI for activity that would otherwise be lawful.

The framework also argues that Congress should not create any new federal rulemaking body to regulate AI and should instead maintain a sector-specific approach using existing regulatory bodies.

The Political Reality

Don't hold your breath for a quick vote. House Republican leaders endorsed the framework and said they're ready to work across the aisle, but passing legislation would be a heavy lift requiring agreement with Democrats in the Senate as divisions over AI run deep.

Some Democrats aren't buying it. Rep. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey said the proposal fails to address strong accountability for AI companies and that Americans need real protection, not a framework that allows the AI industry to operate like the Wild West.

On the other side, pro-innovation voices are largely cheering. NetChoice's Patrick Hedger argued that a light-touch regulatory environment, not 50 conflicting regulatory regimes, enabled the internet revolution, and that AI will require the same approach to win globally.

Whether or not this specific framework becomes law, it signals the direction Washington wants to move: federal control, minimal friction for companies and a bet that innovation should lead policy rather than the other way around. For creators, the IP question is one to watch closely. For parents and educators, the child safety provisions are meaningful, even if the broader accountability gaps make some nervous. And for anyone building in the AI space right now, the regulatory environment just got a little clearer and a lot more federal.

But that only works if we trust the system enforcing it. Without real oversight, a light-touch approach can quickly turn into no accountability at all.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI tailwinds will drive gains for this software stock after a decline to start 2026, Mizuho says - CNBC

• These coders want AI to take their jobs - Vox

• Alibaba launches latest agentic AI platform with international unit's Accio Work - Yahoo Finance

• Alibaba International Launches Accio Work, an Enterprise AI Agent for Global Businesses - PR NewsWire

• New Cognex Research Reveals Manufacturers Increasingly Expect AI Vision Systems to Deliver Both High Performance and Simplicity - Yahoo Finance

Creator Economy

• Fanfix Celebrates Five Years of Empowering Creators, Surpassing $250 Million in Total Payouts - PR NewsWire

• As the Creator Economy Scales, Qoruz Is Building for What Comes Next - Entrack

• Joint signings highlight growing convergence between creator and Hollywood agencies - Digiday

• A year after Unilever, the ad-funded creator economy is still catching up to its own ambition - Digiday

• The Creator Economy in Los Angeles, 2026: A New Frontier - LATimes

• Cannes' Marche du Film to host creator economy summit - MSN

Web3 

• Bitmine Ethereum Holdings Hit 4.66M ETH as Crypto Reserves Reach $11B - Bitcoin News

• How Artificial Intelligence is Rewriting Crypto Banking - Outlook

• Nasdaq seeks to build crypto into Wall Street’s market plumbing - MSN

• SEC Clarifies Crypto Laws -- Here's What It Means for Investors - AOL

• Bitcoin drops below $69,000 as war fears weigh on crypto markets - MSN

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

I've been coming to SXSW for over 15 years. I've watched the festival cycle through every identity: the year of Twitter, Foursquare, Uber, VR, NFTs, AI, and everything in between.

This year, the creator economy fully arrived. With SXSW's Creator Economy track in its third year, it finally felt integrated into both the official programming and the side events across the city.

Instagram post

I produced and hosted Creatorpalooza for the second year through What’s Trending and sponsored by HeyGen, Stan, LOSTiN. We covered everything from brand partnerships and trust to AI avatars, LinkedIn monetization, mental health, and podcast growth. But more than our event, the entire week pointed to something bigger.

In past years, SXSW was defined by massive brand takeovers and flashy installations. This year felt different.

Activations were more intimate and intentional. While Spotify hosted podcasts and Manychat had their own block party, many brands leaned into smaller, invite-only dinners and gatherings. Others created hands-on experiences like B&H’s Creator Rodeo. Teachable gave us a sunset cruise while producing original content with attending creators and Beehiiv showed up through fireside chats with CEO Tyler Denk.

The throughline: creators don't just want swag bags and photo ops. They want tools, real conversations, connections, spaces to build and of course make money. The brands that leaned into utility over spectacle won the week.

Across the week, one idea kept surfacing: successful creators are operating like full media companies. Producing shows, launching products, running podcasts, and building deeply engaged communities. For brands, that means a mindset shift. Creators aren’t just distribution. They’re partners. The most effective collaborations are embedded in storytelling, not added on as sponsored posts.

Of course, you couldn't escape AI this year too. Nearly a third of all PanelPicker proposals involved AI. What was once a standalone AI track has expanded into a broader Tech & AI category, sponsored by IBM. Meanwhile, crypto has all but vanished from the program, a stark contrast to the NFT surge of 2022 and Web3 hype of 2023.

The conversation itself has matured. Sessions focused less on hype and more on infrastructure: the future of search, AI agents controlling discovery, data center expansion, and the energy demands behind it all.

For creators, the implications are real. As AI increasingly mediates distribution, owning your audience AND your voice becomes non-negotiable.

No Convention Center, No Problem

With the Austin Convention Center undergoing a $1.6 billion rebuild, SXSW leaned fully into a “city as venue” model. Events were spread across downtown including hotels, pop-ups, and dedicated clubhouses for Innovation, Film & TV, and Music. It made the experience feel less like a conference and more like a discovery process.

One of the biggest themes this year was also the international presence. SXSW has always drawn a global crowd, but the energy was different. It wasn't just about showing up. It was about recruiting, especially given the current climate around jobs and the economy stateside.

The French House (La French Touch) ran panels on AI, XR, and networking backed by Bpifrance and the French Embassy. São Paulo House took over Congress Avenue for four days. There was a German Haus, UK House, Ireland House, plus Czech, Argentina, and Poland houses.

Instagram post

I joined the EU in the US team and their event at the German Haus for a fireside chat with Deputy Head of the EU Delegation in Washington, Ruth Bajada. We discussed the future of digital work and life, from Europe’s AI Act to my work on the Creator Bill of Rights and Creators 4 Mental Health.

The takeaway from SXSW this year is clear: the future belongs to those who own their audience, build real community, and think globally.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI May Not Have Taken Your Job, But It Might Have Gotten Your Raise

• Oil relief sparks a stock rally, but Cramer says Nvidia’s AI boom is the real story

• How we’re reimagining Maps with Gemini

• Exclusive: Meta planning sweeping layoffs as AI costs mount

• Labor market impacts of AI: A new measure and early evidence

• Government backtracks on AI and copyright after outcry from major artists

Creator Economy

• Marche du Film launches inaugural Creator Economy Summit

• Nigeria powers Africa's $3.1B creator economy — but platform economics ensure Silicon Valley captures the value

• Creator Economy Statistics 2026: 120+ Data Points Every Marketer Should Know

• 17 creator-economy startups to watch in 2026, according to VCs

• Journalist-turned-news content creator Chris Vazquez on building a career in the creator economy

• A new studio is betting that Hollywood talent and first-party data will reshape creator monetization

• Brands turn niche news creators into a new earned media engine

Web3 

• Crypto.com lays off 12% of workforce as latest company to cite AI in job cuts

• As crypto trading platforms race to deploy AI agents, here's what a Nasdaq executive is seeing

• Web3 experts back blockchain as key to trustworthy AI

• How Eric Trump Became an Ally of One of China’s Biggest Crypto Companies

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

Do you actually know what happens to your conversations, your image, your surroundings after they’re captured by an AI-powered device?

If your answer is “not really,” you’re not alone. And this week, a series of revelations made it clear that the gap between what we think is happening with our data and what’s actually happening with it is wider than most of us realized.

Instagram post

A joint investigation by Swedish newspapers Svenska Dagbladet and Göteborgs-Posten dropped a bombshell: when users activate the AI assistant on Meta’s Ray-Ban smart glasses by saying “Hey Meta,” the footage isn’t just processed by algorithms. It’s routed to Sama, a data annotation company in Nairobi, Kenya, where human contractors review and label the video to train Meta’s AI.

What those workers are seeing is deeply concerning. Contractors described reviewing footage of people’s bank cards, explicit content, users in bathrooms, and people undressing without any knowledge they were being recorded.

One worker told investigators they don’t think the people in the footage know they’re being captured, because if they did, they wouldn’t be recording.

Meta says it blurs faces in footage sent for annotation. But former employees and current workers told investigators the system regularly fails, especially in difficult lighting conditions. Workers also noted their personal phones are banned inside the office, likely to prevent footage from leaking.

As of this week, Meta is now facing a class action lawsuit filed March 4 in federal court in San Francisco. The plaintiffs, who purchased the glasses based on marketing that called them “designed for privacy,” allege Meta failed to disclose the role of human reviewers in its AI training pipeline.

The complaint, per Engadget, argues the undisclosed human review process transforms the product from a personal device into what it calls a “surveillance conduit.”

Meta’s defense has been consistent: the data is filtered, the practice is disclosed in their privacy policy, and it’s in line with industry standards. But here’s the thing. The privacy policy governs the wearer’s agreement with Meta. If someone wearing these glasses walks into your home, your doctor’s office, or your bedroom, you never signed anything. You’re the person being annotated.

For European users, this runs headfirst into GDPR, which requires consent from every data subject, including bystanders. Kenya, where the footage lands, has no EU adequacy decision, raising serious questions about the legality of cross-border data transfers.

This Isn’t an Isolated Incident

The privacy risks around wearable AI have been flagged before. In October 2024, two Harvard students, AnhPhu Nguyen and Caine Ardayfio, built a project called I-XRAY that paired Meta’s Ray-Ban glasses with facial recognition software and public databases. They were able to identify strangers on campus in under a minute, pulling up names, home addresses, and phone numbers just by looking at someone. They never released the code. They built it as a proof of concept to show how easy it could be to exploit everyday wearable tech, and the demonstration went viral.

Meta has sold an estimated 7 million Ray-Ban AI glasses in 2025 alone, tripling 2023 and 2024 combined. Transparently, I have worked with Meta before, have been gifted a pair too. The glasses look like ordinary sunglasses, which is precisely what makes them different from Google Glass, which died partly because wearers were visually identifiable. Meta solved the design problem but the privacy problem never really got solved it seems. It got hidden.

The Workplace Is Having the Same Conversation

This isn’t just about wearables. The same privacy tension is playing out in offices and virtual meetings right now.

AI transcription tools like Otter.ai, which integrates with Zoom, Google Meet, and Microsoft Teams, have exploded in workplace adoption. But in August 2025, Otter was hit with a federal class action lawsuit alleging it secretly recorded private conversations and used them to train its machine learning models without proper consent from all participants. The plaintiff wasn’t even an Otter user.

His conversations were captured simply because someone else in the meeting was running the tool.

Users have shared stories on social media about Otter’s automated tools backfiring: recording meetings with investors and then sharing transcripts containing confidential deal details, or continuing to capture audio after attendees had left a call. As the IAPP noted, organizations are now grappling with what it calls “the second wave of AI governance”: managing not just what goes into AI tools, but what those tools capture from us.

Over a dozen U.S. states require all-party consent before a conversation can be recorded, which you might have noticed as that pop up that now comes up for your to consent when someone starts recording a meeting. However, smart glasses and AI transcription tools create scenarios where bystanders, coworkers, or meeting attendees may be recorded or have their conversations documented without ever knowing it. As workplace privacy lawyers have pointed out, unlike traditional recording that often requires deliberate action, AI glasses and transcription bots can passively capture and transcribe conversations throughout the day, creating permanent, searchable records of discussions that participants never knew were being documented.

Why This Matters for Creators and Entrepreneurs

If you're building a brand, producing content, or running a business, this is directly relevant to you. Your meetings are being transcribed, your face is in datasets and your voice could be training an AI model you've never heard of. And the terms of service you clicked through two years ago may have given a company permission to do all of it. Plus, let’s be honest, most of us don’t even read all of it, but that’s a whole other story. But this cuts both ways. The Ray-Ban Meta glasses became a hit with creators for good reason. Hands-free POV content, vlogging without a visible camera, capturing moments on the go.

But now there are real questions creators need to ask themselves before they hit record. Are you capturing bystanders who never consented? Are you filming in spaces where people have a reasonable expectation of privacy? Is the footage you're shooting being sent to third-party reviewers you didn't know existed? The same device that makes content creation seamless also might make passive surveillance seamless, and the line between the two is thinner than most creators realize. Whether you're the one wearing the glasses or the one standing next to someone who is, there are a lot more factors to consider now than just the shot.

A 2025 Cisco benchmark study found that 64% of respondents worry about inadvertently sharing sensitive information with generative AI tools, yet nearly half admit to inputting personal or non-public data. That tension between convenience and control is where most of us are living right now.

The EU AI Act, which becomes fully applicable in August 2026, will establish new requirements around data protection impact assessments, audit trails, and human oversight for high-risk AI systems. In the U.S., 18 state privacy laws are now active, and enforcement is accelerating. Colorado’s Algorithmic Accountability Law, effective February 2026, grants consumers rights to notice, explanation, and appeal when AI systems make decisions about them.

For creators specifically, this means being intentional about the tools you use and understanding what you’re giving up in exchange for convenience. Read the privacy policies of your transcription tools. Ask whether your data is being used to train models. Opt out where you can. And push for better defaults from the platforms you depend on.

We’re in a moment where the technology has outpaced the rules, and the companies building these products know it. Meta marketed its glasses as “designed for privacy” while reportedly routing intimate footage to human reviewers in Kenya. Otter.ai positioned itself as a productivity tool while using private conversations to train its AI. The pattern is consistent: ship fast, bury the disclosure, and let the lawsuits catch up later.

I don’t think the answer is to stop using technology. But I do think we need to be much more honest about the trade-offs we’re making. Every time you say “Hey Meta” or let an AI bot join your Zoom call, you’re making a decision about your data, and potentially about the data of everyone around you.

My company, What’s Trending, previously covered this story here.

Find me at SXSW!

: I'm heading to EU House at SXSW for a fireside chat with EU Deputy Ambassador Ruth Bajada on how tech is reshaping work, life and mental health for creators. Join us Friday, March 13 at Speakeasy in Austin from 5:30 - 6:30 p.m. CT. Free to attend. 🔗 RSVP

Creatorpalooza is back! We're bringing panels on brand deals, AI avatars, mental health and podcast growth to SXSW on Sunday, March 15 from 1 - 5 p.m. CT at The Studio at Inn Cahoots. Free event, co-presented by HeyGen, Stan, LOSTiN and ATX Creator Meetups. Registration required.

Instagram post

We're launching virtual group therapy for creators in California through Creators 4 Mental Health x Revive Health Therapy. Sliding-scale, designed for the unique pressures of creator life. More details coming soon. 🔗Creators4mentalhealth.com/grouptherapy

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI firm Anthropic sues US defense department over blacklistingAI firm Anthropic sues US defense department over blacklisting

• Scania: AI-Driven Accuracy Underpins Autonomous Systems

• AI-Powered Edge Video Intelligence Solutions for UAVs & Unmanned Systems

• Rollable laptops and AI super-agents: How Lenovo is revolutionising the future of tech

• Microsoft launches AI tool that competes with Anthropic

• An Amish Avatar and an A.I. Monk Are Pitching Supplements on Social Media

• Artificial Intelligence Is Coming to Local Government — Fort Worth Is Preparing Now

Creator Economy

• Why the creator economy is Broadway’s next media channel

• 17 creator-economy startups to watch in 2026, according to VCs

• Eric Perlmutter-Gumbiner and Lauren Riihimaki Share Insights on Creator Economy Trends

• Creator Economy Market to hit USD 1,072.8 Billion By 2034, Social Media Platforms Dominance

• Can the creator economy stay afloat in a flood of AI slop?

• Every Artist Who Has Told the Trump Administration to Stop Using Their Music

Web3 

• The Real Reason Most Web3 Startups Fail (It’s Not the Market)

• A Crypto Coin Is Gobbling Up U.S. Treasuries

• Coinbase launches regulated crypto futures trading across Europe

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

For the past two years, we’ve been glued to the AI race. Jobs, chips, valuations, Sora, who’s winning, who’s losing, and whether our careers are next. And yes, all of that matters.

But while we were watching that scoreboard, something else was happening in the background. Something most consumers weren’t tracking. And this week, the consumer AI story collided with the national security one.

On Friday, the Trump administration ordered federal agencies to phase out Anthropic’s AI and the Pentagon labeled the company a “supply chain risk.” On Saturday, the U.S. and Israel launched a joint military strike on Iran, killing its Supreme Leader.

And somehow both of those things are part of the same story.

I’ve talked about this before. The US-China AI race isn't really about who builds the better chatbot. It's about power. Military power. Who has the most sophisticated AI wins the next war, the same logic that made nuclear capability the ultimate geopolitical currency for the last 80 years. AI is the new nuclear.

That's not a hot take. That's been the actual stakes all along. But it got buried under the noise of valuations and demo videos while the real chess match was happening in classified networks, defense contracts, and boardrooms we don't have access to.

So here's the backdrop you need: for the past year, the Pentagon has been quietly building out its AI infrastructure. Multiple companies have been in the mix. Palantir has been embedded in defense work for years. xAI signed on with no restrictions. Google's in negotiations. And the two big names most consumers actually use, Anthropic and OpenAI, both had or were seeking classified Pentagon contracts.

What Anthropic Actually Did and Why It Matters

In July 2025, Anthropic signed a $200M contract with the DoD, the first AI company cleared to run inside classified military networks, beating out OpenAI and Google. This was a big deal. Huge, actually.

But Anthropic had two conditions: Claude could not be used for mass surveillance of Americans, and it could not power autonomous weapons, systems that kill without a human making the call.

According to multiple reports, Defense Secretary Hegseth told CEO Dario Amodei: give us unrestricted access or lose everything. He threatened to invoke the Defense Production Act, a Cold War emergency law, to force their hand. Amodei didn't move. He said autonomous weapons are "outside the bounds of what today's technology can safely and reliably do." Then on Friday, the Pentagon designated Anthropic a "supply chain risk," a label normally reserved for companies connected to foreign adversaries like China or Russia. Trump also posted on Truth Social calling the company "leftwing nut jobs" and ordered every federal agency off their platform within six months.

There was actually a sign this was coming.

An Anthropic employee posted a pretty devastating message about the direction things were heading and how the future felt bleak from the inside. It read like a precursor. He clearly knew what was building. 

Hours after Anthropic was blacklisted, OpenAI announced its own Pentagon deal. Founder and CEO Sam Altman says it includes the same protections including no mass surveillance or autonomous weapons. But the key difference: Anthropic wanted those limits in hard contract language. OpenAI agreed to use “for all lawful purposes,” according to its published agreement, and trusted current U.S. law to define the boundaries.

The problem with that? Laws change.

If this administration redefines what "lawful" means, and they've already pushed the edges with ICE's AI surveillance operations, the scope of that clause could shift with it. Altman himself acknowledged that a future legal dispute could expose OpenAI to the same fate as Anthropic. He signed anyway.

Palantir, for context, has stayed completely quiet through all of this. They've had Pentagon contracts for years, they operate deep in defense infrastructure.

Then Came Iran

On Saturday morning, a regular workday in Tehran, the U.S. and Israel launched a joint strike on Iran. Khamenei was killed. Iran retaliated across the Gulf, hitting Bahrain, UAE, Qatar, Kuwait and Israel. Dubai International even shut down indefinitely.

Trump campaigned on no more foreign wars. Now many fear this could spiral into something far bigger. And this is the geopolitical environment AI companies are now embedding themselves into.

A few weeks ago in this newsletter, I wrote about the growing number of people breaking up with OpenAI and switching to Claude. People were frustrated with the direction of the product and, more broadly, their trust in the company.

People Are Breaking Up With ChatGPT for Claude. But Why?

The AI honeymoon might be over and users are rethinking what trust and value actually look like in their AI tools.

shiras-newsletter.beehiiv.com/p/people-are-breaking-up-with-chatgpt-for-claude-but-why

This week adds a new layer to that conversation.

The AI we use isn’t neutral. The companies behind it make choices, about government access, military contracts, and what lines they will or won’t cross when the pressure gets real.

Anthropic just showed you where their line is.
OpenAI just showed you theirs.
Palantir has never pretended to draw one.

The AI race was never just about who builds the best product. It’s about who shapes how this technology is used and who decides its boundaries when the stakes stop being theoretical.

PS: On a personal note, I’ll be paying closer attention to the companies I use and support. I want to back the ones deploying this technology in ways that advance humanity, not fracture it.

I’m also navigating my own feelings about jumping ship from ChatGPT, which I’ve unfortunately been in a long relationship with. I’ll let you know how that goes soon…

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• IBM is the latest AI casualty. Shares tank 13% on Anthropic programming language threat - CNBC

• Anthropic's AI model surpasses ChatGPT in app store | KTVU

• 4 AI lessons I learnt from the world’s leading players last month

• An Ohio newspaper has a new star writer. It isn’t human.

• Japan is betting big on AI. Few workers have used it.

• Rightmove: ‘AI won’t replace us’

Creator Economy

• Can the creator economy stay afloat in a flood of AI slop? - TechCrunch

• IAB’s Zoe Soon: Media Agencies Increasingly Consider Creator Economy ‘A Must Buy’

• How the Creator Economy Has Changed Marketing and ‘Democratized the Launch of Consumer Products’

• A New AI Influencer Marketing Agency Is Here for the Post-Follower Era

• Tokyo Drift Trend Goes Viral After IShowSpeed Pulled AI Likeness Consent Following Massive Sora 2 Regret

• Paramount Skydance Officially Acquires Warner Bros. Discovery in $110 Billion Deal

Web3 

• Binance Employees Find $1.7 Billion in Crypto Was Sent to Iranian Entities - NY Times

• South Korean Police Lose Seized Crypto By Posting Password Online

• 8 Blockchain Infrastructure Protocols Quietly Powering Web3

• AI agents will bring crypto to masses, says Animoca's Yat Siu

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

Happy Valentine's Day weekend, everyone. While some of you were buying chocolates and booking dinner reservations, a very different kind of breakup has been playing out across the internet, and this one involves AI.

People are leaving ChatGPT. 

Not all of them, and not overnight, but the trend is real and accelerating. And the rebound? It's Claude, Anthropic's AI assistant, that's been quietly winning hearts (and workflows) while OpenAI deals with what might be its messiest era yet.

So what's going on? Let's break it down.

To advertise or not to advertise, that is the question?

ChatGPT's app market share dropped from 69.1% to 45.3% between January 2025 and January 2026, according to data from mobile intelligence firm Apptopia. Web traffic tells a similar story. Similarweb data shows ChatGPT's market share falling from roughly 87% to around 65% in the same period.

Meanwhile, Claude may have a smaller user base overall, but a huge and interesting note is that people who use Claude really use it. 

According to Apptopia, Claude leads all AI chatbots in average time spent per daily active user at 34.7 minutes. Among power users, engagement surged 377% from June to December 2025. That's not casual browsing, that's people building their workflows around it.

Entrepreneur Jason Calacanis publicly announced he cancelled his $10,000/year corporate OpenAI account, saying Claude was better for corporate work. He's far from the only one making the switch.

If you watched the Super Bowl last weekend (congrats, Seahawks fans), you probably noticed AI companies dominated the commercial breaks. Adweek reported that 15 of 66 ads (23%) were either from AI companies or made with AI. 

But the one everyone was talking about? Anthropic's debut campaign for Claude. 

In one, a guy asks a beefy bystander for workout tips, only to get a robotic pitch for shoe insoles. In another, a man seeking advice about communicating with his mother gets served an ad for a dating app targeting older women. The tagline: "Ads are coming to AI. But not to Claude."

It was a direct shot at OpenAI, which had announced plans to start testing ads in ChatGPT's free and lower-cost tiers. And the timing couldn't have been more savage. Gizmodo reported that ChatGPT officially rolled out ads the very next day.

Sam Altman didn't stay quiet. He fired back on X, calling the Anthropic ads "funny" but "clearly dishonest," and accused Anthropic of serving "an expensive product to rich people." He argued OpenAI needs ads to keep AI accessible to the billions who can't pay for subscriptions.

The internet largely sided with Anthropic on this one. Altman, responding to a comedic Super Bowl ad with a corporate-sounding statement, didn't exactly help his case. And the data backs up the impact. BNP Paribas analysis reported by CNBC showed Claude's daily active users jumped 11% post-game, the biggest bump of any AI company that advertised. Claude also hit the top 10 free apps on the Apple App Store.

I believe trust is at the center of it all.

When you talk to an AI chatbot, you're often sharing things you wouldn't share publicly like work problems, health questions, personal dilemmas and financial concerns. Anthropic made this exact point in their blog post announcing the ad-free commitment, noting that a significant portion of Claude conversations involve sensitive or deeply personal topics.

OpenAI says ads won't influence ChatGPT's answers, and your conversations stay private from advertisers. But as Miranda Bogen, director of the AI Governance Lab at the Center for Democracy & Technology, pointed out: business models based on targeted advertising create dangerous incentives for user privacy, regardless of what platforms claim.

It's worth remembering that Sam Altman himself once called ads in ChatGPT "the last resort" and described mixing advertising with AI as "sort of uniquely unsettling." Now that it's happening, it feels like a line has been crossed for a lot of users.

Anthropic is betting on a different model: enterprise contracts and paid subscriptions. And it's working. Claude Code and Cowork have reportedly already brought in over $1 billion in revenue, according to Axios. The company also just closed a $30 billion funding round at a $380 billion valuation.

But Claude Isn't Perfect Either

Before we crown a winner, let's talk about the elephant in the room.

Anthropic launched Cowork, a tool that lets Claude operate directly on your computer, access your files, control your browser, and connect to enterprise apps. It's incredibly powerful but it’s also raised serious security concerns.

Just two days after launch, security researchers at PromptArmor demonstrated that attackers could trick Cowork into silently uploading your confidential files to their own Anthropic account through a prompt injection attack. No malware needed. And the vulnerability had been reported to Anthropic three months earlier and wasn't patched before launch.

Security Boulevard reported that Anthropic acknowledged the risks and told users to avoid granting access to sensitive files, while simultaneously marketing Cowork as a tool to organize your desktop.

As security researcher Simon Willison noted, it's not fair to tell regular non-programmer users to watch out for "suspicious actions that may indicate prompt injection." Most people wouldn't even know what that means.

Anthropic is winning the trust conversation on ads and privacy, but giving an AI agent direct access to your computer introduces a whole different category of risk. 

Both companies are asking users to trust them with deeply personal access. They're just doing it in different ways.

What we're watching is also a fundamental split in how they each think about their relationship with users. OpenAI is building an everything-platform: ads, subscriptions, enterprise, consumer, agents, image generation, video, and voice. Anthropic is positioning Claude as a focused thinking tool that works in your interest, not an advertiser's.

Neither approach is without tradeoffs. 

OpenAI's scale means more people get access to AI for free. Anthropic's model means a better experience, but primarily for people willing to pay. Neowin rightly points out that keeping frontier AI behind paywalls risks limiting access. Though Anthropic did just expand Claude's free tier this week to include file creation, connectors, and skills, a move clearly designed to attract ChatGPT users who don't want ads.

It’s about values too…

The trust question goes deeper than ads though. It goes back to who built these companies, why, and how they govern their AI.

Anthropic was founded in 2021 by Dario and Daniela Amodei, both former OpenAI employees who left over disagreements about safety and commercialization. They built it as a public benefit corporation from day one. Claude is trained using Constitutional AI, where the model checks its own outputs against a transparent set of ethical principles. The company operates under a Responsible Scaling Policy with AI Safety Levels that automatically tighten as models get more powerful, and it's committed not to deploy models unless adequate safeguards are in place. Dario has consistently pushed for government regulation, telling 60 Minutes he's "deeply uncomfortable" with a handful of tech CEOs making these decisions alone.

OpenAI launched as a nonprofit in 2015 to build AI that "safely benefits humanity." Since then, it's pushed toward becoming a for-profit, drawn a lawsuit from co-founder Elon Musk, and walked back its restructuring under pressure. Sam Altman once urged Congress to regulate AI, then called regulation "disastrous." And just this week, Business Standard reported that OpenAI quietly removed the word "safely" from its mission statement entirely.

For a growing number of users, these different corporate structures, safety frameworks and stances on regulation, matter. So, the reality is that the AI honeymoon phase might be over. One in five AI users now uses multiple apps, and the smartest move might be exactly that.

My advice? Date around a bit before you commit and do you own hands on research too. Happy Valentine's month! Choose your AI wisely. 💘

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Something big is happening in AI- and most people will be blindsided

• He spent decades perfecting his voice. Now he says Google stole it.

• Exclusive: Pentagon threatens to cut off Anthropic in AI safeguards dispute

• Obama responds to Trump sharing racist AI video depicting him as an ape

• I got laid off from Amazon after 11 years. My high school daughter taught me the biggest lesson on how to move forward.

• ‘We’re All Polyamorous Now. It’s You, Me and the A.I.’

• The AI productivity take-off is finally visible

• No swiping involved: the AI dating apps promising to find your soulmate

Creator Economy

• Artists, Athletes Exit Wasserman Agency After CEO’s Name Surfaces in Epstein Files

• Twitch Previews 2026 Updates Focused on Streaming, Moderation, and Monetization

• A brand trip’: How the creator economy showed up at this year’s Super Bowl

• ‘Mormon Wives’ Producer Secures $50 Million for Creator-Economy Push

• Creator-economy unicorn LTK lays off staff as it doubles down on its new marketing tech for brands

Web3 

• In bitcoin price plummet, ETF flows are down but aren't signaling 'crypto winter' investor panic

• Wall Street giant Apollo follows BlackRock in DeFi push with Morpho token deal

• Her Divorce Was Ugly. Crypto Became a Lifeline

• YZi Labs is backing AI, biotech and Web3

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

Something important happened last week, and in the midst of the Epstein Files, the Savannah Guthrie kidnapping, the Super Bowl, the Olympics, and the rest of the national noise, most people missed it.

New York passed a law requiring advertisers to disclose when an ad uses AI generated synthetic performers. That includes digital humans that look or sound real, even if they are not based on a specific celebrity. The rule applies to ads shown to New York audiences, regardless of where they were created, and it goes into effect in June 2026.

This is the first time a U.S. state has clearly said that audiences deserve to know when a human presence in media is not actually human. That idea may sound obvious, but until now it has lived mostly in ethics discussions and policy proposals, not law.

The White House has issued executive actions discouraging state by state AI regulation in favor of federal review. New York passed this anyway. That tension matters. It shows how fast this is moving and how little patience states have to wait for a national standard.

Advertising is where regulation tends to start because brands are measurable and dollars leave a paper trail. But creators are not far behind in this conversation.

Creators already operate in a space built on trust. People follow you because they believe you are real. Sponsored posts are disclosed. Filters are usually obvious. Editing is expected.

AI changes that equation in ways audiences are not prepared for yet.

Tools now exist that can replicate voices, generate faces, put words in your mouth, and scale your presence without your physical participation. None of this is inherently bad. A lot of it is interesting and useful and can improve storytelling and reach. I am personally into anything that helps me work more efficiently and create better output.

But it also changes the question audiences ask.

It is no longer just “Is this sponsored.”
It becomes “Who am I actually hearing from, and who decided that voice should exist.”

We already saw public pushback when Vogue used an AI generated model last year. The backlash was not about the tech. It was about trust, representation, and transparency. I spoke about this on CNN at the time because it felt like an early signal of how uncomfortable people are when human likeness is simulated without context.

This matters even more as companies like Meta build entire business units around AI generated content and AI optimized advertising. If platforms are selling AI created creative as a product to brands, regulators and audiences are going to start asking similar transparency questions of creators too.

This also comes as platforms like YouTube say they are cracking down on low quality AI slop channels. That stance sounds good in theory, but it is harder to imagine platforms holding advertisers to the same standard when ad dollars are involved. If anything, this makes disclosure even more important, because consumer protection should not depend on whether content is organic or paid.

New York’s law does not mention creators. It does not regulate influencers (human or AI) or touch organic content. Yet.

What it introduces is a principle that is hard to contain once it exists:
• That human likeness carries meaning
• That audiences deserve to know when what they are watching was made by a human or primarily by a machine
• That transparency matters

Here is where this gets messy. If every state passes its own version of an AI disclosure law with slightly different requirements, companies, platforms, and creators are stuck navigating a compliance maze. That slows innovation and advantages the biggest players who can afford legal teams. This is why the EU’s AI Act keeps coming up in these conversations. It is not perfect, but it treats AI governance like infrastructure, with consistent rules around risk, disclosure, and accountability across countries.

I wrote a deeper breakdown of how the EU is approaching this and what it could mean for creators and platforms. Read more here.

Transparency around AI is about to become a trust signal. Creators who decide their boundaries now will be ahead of the platforms that wait to be forced.

Keeping my eye on…

Discord's Mandatory Age Verification

Starting next month, Discord will require all 200+ million users globally to verify their age through face scans or government ID uploads—or accept severe restrictions. Users who don't verify will be locked into "teen" settings, losing access to age-restricted servers, DMs from strangers, and adult content. The backlash is fierce, especially since hackers breached a Discord vendor in 2025, exposing roughly 70,000 government IDs. Despite Discord's promises that face scans stay on-device and IDs are deleted immediately, users are furious about mandatory verification following a data breach. This could become a test case for whether platforms can force invasive age checks without losing their user base.

• Discord's official announcement

• User backlash over privacy concerns

• What happens if you don't verify
  
  Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI Doesn’t Reduce Work—It Intensifies It

• Amazon discusses AI content marketplace with publishers, The Information reports

• These Two Bitcoin Miners Can Hitch a Ride on the AI Express

• Amazon Discusses AI Content Marketplace With Publishers

• Meet the One Woman Anthropic Trusts to Teach AI Morals

• This job has become the ultimate case study for why AI won’t replace human workers

• Alphabet calls out new AI-related risks, as it taps debt market to fund buildout

Creator Economy

• Creators are changing everything

• Twitch targets the wider creator economy with new Business Manager role

• How Blockchain Technology is Powering the Creator Economy

• MrBeast, Dhar Mann, and the Creator Takeover of Super Bowl Week

• Center for the Creator Economy Ramps Up With New Space, Initiatives, and Tour

• Creators Move to Unionize. Hollywood Wants to Help. Solidarity Not Guaranteed

Web3 

• Top 5 Web3 Infrastructure Failures and What They Taught Us

• Crypto revolt exposes fragility of Trump's coalition

• The Trump family’s crypto portfolio is getting battered with the rest of the industry

• One Generation Runs the Country. The Next Cashed In on Crypto.

• Crypto Crashes Rattle Venture Capitalists After $19 Billion Haul

• S Korean crypto firm accidentally pays out $40bn in bitcoin

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

The past two years have been an inflection point for social media, playing out across platforms, courtrooms, and public opinion. And as someone who works directly in digital mental health and creator well-being, I’ve been watching this moment with both urgency and caution. I care deeply about the young people growing up in these spaces, and I believe action is necessary, which is exactly why I think we need clarity, not just panic, and solutions grounded in evidence.

Back in 2020, The Social Dilemma raised alarms about algorithms, addiction, and how our brains are being shaped on social media. Since then, the conversation has only intensified. Jonathan Haidt’s The Anxious Generation poured fuel on the fire, and Australia just became the first country to pass a law banning kids under 16 from major platforms like Instagram, TikTok, Facebook, X, and YouTube. Platforms there now face fines of up to $49.5 million AUD if they don’t take “reasonable steps” to keep kids out.

In the US, it’s hitting a fever pitch. Lawmakers are holding hearings, states are filing lawsuits, and headlines scream that platforms are “addicting kids,” “rewiring brains,” and “causing a mental health crisis.”

Depending on who you listen to, this is either the long‑overdue moment of accountability for Big Tech or the start of a sweeping overcorrection that could permanently reshape the social web. I think the real risk is confusing visibility with progress, mistaking outrage for solutions.

So what’s actually happening here?

At the center of this moment is a landmark lawsuit in California targeting companies like Meta, TikTok, YouTube, and Snapchat. The claim is straightforward on its surface: these platforms intentionally design products to be addictive, causing harm to minors. If that framing sticks, it opens the door to sweeping regulation, new liability, and potentially a redefinition of how social media works.

It’s important to note that TikTok and Snapchat have settled (which says a lot I think), while the rest are fighting back.

But the science underneath these claims is far less settled than the rhetoric suggests, and if we care about kids’ mental health, we need to get the science right.

There are studies showing correlations between heavy social media use and anxiety, depression, or lower well-being in teens. Large reviews, including a 2020 systematic review from the UK, have found consistent associations between high-intensity use, such as excessive time spent or constant checking, and higher rates of anxiety and depression. Other research has linked heavy use to body image concerns and disrupted sleep, both of which are known risk factors for poor mental health.

Taken together, the evidence suggests that very high use, often defined as more than three hours a day, is associated with higher risk, particularly for adolescent girls. Sleep disruption, social comparison, and exposure to harmful or idealized content appear to be some of the key pathways driving these effects. The US Surgeon General’s 2023 advisory echoed these concerns, warning that excessive social media use may pose risks for youth mental health, especially when it interferes with sleep or offline relationships.

At the same time, many researchers emphasize that these relationships are complex and often bidirectional. Teens who are already struggling with anxiety or depression may be more likely to spend excessive time online, making it difficult to untangle cause and effect. Correlation isn’t causation, especially in a system as complex as adolescent mental health.

When you look closely at the data, the effects are often smaller and more nuanced than the headlines suggest. A 2024 evidence review from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine found that most links between social media use and adolescent mental health are modest, highly variable, and shaped by context, including age, gender, and what’s happening offline. The report also concluded that current research does not establish clear causal evidence that social media use directly leads to mental illness.

Just as importantly, the timeline isn’t clear-cut. Signs of declining youth mental health began appearing before many of today’s biggest platforms. Smartphones changed daily habits, but so did academic pressure, economic stress, sleep patterns, and the constant pace of modern life. For critics, it remains difficult to separate what’s driving what.

That’s where journalists like Taylor Lorenz and outlets like Techdirt have pushed back, arguing that we’re repeating a familiar pattern.

Every generation has had its villain technology. For instance, novels were said to corrupt women, comic books were blamed for juvenile delinquency and television was accused of rotting brains. The telephone supposedly destroyed real relationships. Each time, a moral panic arrived before the evidence fully caught up.

One of the most contested parts of the current lawsuit is the word “addiction.”

Platforms are absolutely designed to form habits. Engagement is the business model, and features like infinite scroll and algorithmic feeds are built to keep you on the app.

But equating habit-forming design with chemical addiction and dependency is where some have pushed back. Addiction, in the clinical sense, involves tolerance, withdrawal, and physiological dependence. A peer-reviewed review published through the National Institutes of Health found that only a small minority of users, around 4 percent, reported experiencing anything resembling withdrawal-like symptoms when unable to access social media, such as restlessness or distress. The most common reported behavior was simply thinking about social media frequently, which researchers note is not unique to digital platforms.

Framing social media as inherently addictive doesn’t just stretch the evidence, it also risks removing human agency from the equation. The same research shows that a far larger share of frequent users, roughly half in some studies, recognize their habits and report being able to change them when motivated by sleep, school, or well-being concerns.

That doesn’t mean harms don’t exist. Some kids absolutely struggle online. Some adults do too. And as someone who advocates for mental health in digital spaces, I take those struggles seriously. But broad claims that social media is uniquely destroying an entire generation flatten a complex reality and risk leading us toward blunt solutions for nuanced problems.

There’s also a quieter consequence worth naming.

When social media itself is put “on trial,” journalists get swept up in it. Platform reporting becomes polarized and nuance is punished. If you question the panic, you’re accused of defending Big Tech. If you amplify harms, you’re accused of fearmongering. The middle ground, where most evidence actually lives, becomes harder to occupy.

And that should worry us.

Because once governments gain new authority to regulate speech and platform design under the banner of protection, that power rarely stays narrowly scoped. Legal scholars and digital rights groups have warned that addiction-based liability claims could weaken longstanding protections like Section 230, with ripple effects for creators, journalists, and smaller platforms that lack legal defenses.

As someone working on creator advocacy, labor protections, and mental health, I’m deeply concerned about this generation, the first to grow up entirely inside algorithmic systems.

And to be clear: inaction is not an option. We need stronger guardrails for minors, more transparency from platforms, and real support systems for kids and creators who are genuinely struggling.

But meaningful action starts with accurate diagnosis. That means age-appropriate design standards, independent data access for researchers, and mental health resources that meet young people where they actually are, online and offline. It also means addressing power imbalances without collapsing complex human behavior into a single villain.

In my own research on creator mental health, I’ve seen how digital environments can amplify stress, burnout, and emotional vulnerability, especially when people feel trapped inside systems they don’t control. Those findings mirror what many teens experience, too. The harms are real for some, and they deserve targeted, evidence-based interventions, not blanket assumptions.

What we shouldn’t do is let moral panic drive policy that overshoots, misfires, or unintentionally harms the very communities we’re trying to protect.

Kids deserve protection, not performative outrage. And if we care about their mental health, we owe them policies that are as thoughtful, nuanced, and evidence-based as the lives they’re growing up in.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI agents now have their own Reddit-style social network, and it’s getting weird fast

• AI-induced cultural stagnation is no longer speculation − it’s already happening

• ‘Spy Sheikh’ Bought Secret Stake in Trump Company

• An A.I. Pioneer Warns the Tech ‘Herd’ Is Marching Into a Dead End

• AI Agents Are Mathematically Incapable of Doing Functional Work, Paper Finds

• How a Canadian in Rome is building a Catholic AI from Vatican archives

Creator Economy

• How Grail Talent Is Professionalizing the Creator Economy at Scale

• The Creator Economy In 2026 : The Era Of Consolidation

• NFL Appoints YouTube Star Dhar Mann as First Chief Kindness Officer for Super Bowl LX

• YouTube Star Markiplier’s Self-Financed Horror Film ‘Iron Lung’ Is Opening on 4,000 Screens After Fan Demand

• TikTok Star Khaby Lame Sells His Brand in Nearly $1B Deal

Web3 

• 'This is absolutely INSANE': Bitcoin’s weekend crash exposes the cracks beneath crypto’s latest boom

• Grayscale’s Vision: Smart Contract Platforms Powering the Future of Web3 Ecosystem

• Hong Kong is positioning itself as crypto’s global connector, says lawmaker Johnny Ng

• From Attention To Action: The Next Experiment In Crypto Incentives

• U.A.E. Firm Quietly Bought 49% Stake In Trump Crypto Firm

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

As I write this on Sunday night, January 25, my latest TikTok video has zero views, and the mobile editing app I usually rely on, CapCut, which is owned by TikTok’s parent company ByteDance, isn’t fully functioning either.

I’m not alone. Across the platform, users are reporting videos that won’t upload, posts that don’t reach followers, and feeds that feel oddly frozen.

Instagram post

Some creators, including actress/comedy Meg Stalter, are also alleging content suppression when attempting to post about ICE-related topics.

Whatever the cause, TikTok appears to be in a moment of technical instability and trust erosion, one that coincides with its ongoing ownership transition in the United States. That uncertainty is already pushing some users to explore alternatives.

A few platforms seeing a noticeable surge in attention:

• Rueblur — a minimalist, creator-first social app designed to reduce algorithmic pressure and doomscrolling

• Skylight Social — a decentralized, Bluesky-adjacent platform built on open standards and user ownership

• Spill — a culture-forward, Black-owned social platform positioning itself as a safer, more intentional space for conversation

I’ve been covering TikTok’s regulatory fight in the United States since the very beginning. What started in 2020 as national security concerns gradually escalated into years of court challenges, congressional hearings, executive orders, and widespread public confusion.

That tension peaked in April 2024 when Congress passed the Protecting Americans from Foreign Adversary Controlled Applications Act. The law required that TikTok’s owner, Bytedance, divest or restructure its U.S. operations so the platform would be majority owned and controlled by American entities in order to continue operating in the United States.

What followed were months of speculation and behind-the-scenes negotiations. Reports floated potential buyers and ownership structures, ranging from U.S. tech companies to private equity–backed consortiums. All the while, TikTok publicly pushed back, appealed the law, and warned that a forced sale could disrupt the platform entirely.

For creators and users, it created a prolonged limbo. Deadlines shifted. Court challenges dragged on. And no one knew whether TikTok would ultimately be banned, sold, or fundamentally restructured.

This week (January 22, 2026), the transition finally happened and TikTok announced the creation of TikTok USDS Joint Venture LLC, a new legal entity designed to bring the platform into compliance with U.S. law and allow it to continue operating.

After years of shifting deadlines, legal challenges, and political uncertainty, the announcement feels like a turning point. But it also raises a critical question:

What actually changes for the people using the app?

What TikTok USDS Is Meant to Do

According to TikTok and reporting from Reuters, under the new structure, TikTok’s U.S. operations are now majority owned and controlled by a consortium of American investors, though the full list has not been publicly disclosed.

TikTok’s parent company, ByteDance, retains just under a 20 percent stake. TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew remains on the board alongside U.S.-based executives and U.S. user data will be stored and secured within Oracle’s U.S. cloud infrastructure and governed by enhanced cybersecurity safeguards.

The company also claims the new entity will hold decision-making authority over trust and safety policies, content moderation, and protection of the recommendation system.

Instagram post

On paper, the goal is clear: separate U.S. operations from foreign influence and satisfy long-standing government concerns. The reality? Compliance on paper doesn’t automatically resolve questions of trust or control.

Does the App Look or Feel Different

For now, users don’t need to download a new app or migrate accounts. TikTok remains TikTok, at least on the surface.

That said, TikTok has confirmed that the U.S. entity will retrain and operate portions of the recommendation system using U.S. data. While technical details haven’t been disclosed, experts note that even subtle shifts in how an algorithm is trained can affect content visibility, moderation decisions, and creator reach over time.

These changes are rarely immediate. They tend to show up slowly, in what performs, what disappears, and who benefits.

Terms of Service and Privacy Policy Concerns

What has also quickly drawn attention are TikTok’s updated Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, which many users were required to accept on the day of the transition in order to access their accounts.

According to reporting from Wired, recent language allows for expanded data collection, including more granular location signals and broader use of data across advertising and AI-driven features.

This matters because these policies apply regardless of whether TikTok is operated by a U.S. entity or a global parent company. Regulatory compliance does not automatically mean stricter limits on data use.

These changes are significant because they apply regardless of whether TikTok is operated by a U.S. entity or a global parent company. In other words, regulatory compliance does not automatically equal stricter limits on data use.

Relationship? Complicated

For years, TikTok’s ownership was framed as a national security issue tied to foreign influence. Now, the concern for many users has shifted inward, including who controls the platform, how decisions are made, and whether increased oversight builds trust or introduces new forms of censorship. In many ways, the fear now feels closer to home.

Using tech for civic action

Instagram post

In light of recent tragic and horrific events in Minneapolis and ongoing concerns around ICE enforcement, many people are looking for ways to take action. My friend Taryn Southern built an automated tool using Claude AI that makes it easy to reach out to your U.S. senators.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage | Cory Doctorow

• AI-induced cultural stagnation is no longer speculation − it’s already happening

• AI can help you unearth the story in your lectures

• Cambridge supercomputer set to get 6 times more powerful as government backs British AI innovation

• UK finance firms to boost hiring in 2026 in search of ethical AI experts

Creator Economy

• 1B Followers Summit, Dubai: The Conversations the Creator Economy Can’t Avoid

• Not all creators are the same: How the creator economy breaks down by business model

• 3 creator economy trends that helped startups pull in millions from investors heading into 2026

• Microshifting Trend Gains Ground as Workers Rethink the 9-to-5

Web3 

• Web3 Security Leader Certik Prepares IPO After Binance Investment

• Cathedrals on Sand Part III: The Decentralization Tax in Web3-AI

• Bitcoin Slumps Past $94K Support, Clarity Act Hits Delays, FTC Crypto Clash & NYSE 24/7 Shift: Web3 Hi...

• Chainwire and Vibranium Audits Form Partnership to Enhance Web3 Security Visibility

• Cayman Web3 company makes Nasdaq move

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

I’m sure we’ve all noticed the latest rising trend across social media.

Captions like “2026 is the new 2016,” often without much explanation. Then suddenly, it was everywhere and yes, I even added my own post to the mix.

Instagram post

The earliest wave appeared right around the start of the new year. In the final days of December and the first week of January, creators began posting photos and videos from 2016 with captions like “wake up, it’s 2016,” “happy 2016,” and “we’re back.” These posts quickly gained traction on TikTok and Instagram, where nostalgia-driven content has been especially sticky.

According to USA Today, the trend began as people dug through their camera rolls to mark the ten-year gap between 2016 and 2026, sharing moments that captured who they were and what life felt like then.

What pushed it from a casual throwback to a full-blown trend was tone. These weren’t just ironic posts. They were emotionally infused. We weren’t only revisiting old outfits or filters; we were revisiting a feeling.

One that stood out for me came from journalist and podcast host Liz Plank, who shared a video capturing the hopeful energy of January 1, 2026, as Zohran Mamdani was sworn in as the new mayor of New York City:

@lizplank

we are so back. #zohranmamdani #zohran #aoc #bernie #millenial

Once TikTok identified that 2016-related videos were holding attention, it began surfacing more of them. People reports that creators even started labeling the trend “2016Tok,” encouraging viewers to stay on that side of the app.

Many leaned further in, posting older photos, using music from that era, and referencing early Instagram and Snapchat filters, along with viral moments like the Mannequin Challenge. Celebrities followed suit, with Meghan Markle even sharing a black-and-white video dancing with Prince Harry.

Cultural analysts note that nostalgia often peaks in ten-year cycles. A decade is far enough away to feel idealized, but close enough to still feel personal. Business Insider explains that millennials and Gen Z are returning to 2016 because it represents a pre-pandemic, pre–AI saturation moment, when social media felt more communal and less optimized.

In 2016, platforms felt simpler. Feeds were more chronological. Filters were playful instead of strategic. Virality felt accidental. Memes felt like shared experiences rather than marketing tools.

That contrast matters in 2026.

We’re living in an era of algorithm fatigue. With AI-generated content everywhere, performance metrics shaping nearly every post, and even authenticity becoming a format, revisiting 2016 feels less like wanting the past back and more like remembering what digital life felt like before constant optimization.

As an elder millennial, I kind of love Gen Z’s fascination with my era, especially compared to millennials’ relative indifference toward Gen X or our side-eye of boomers.

Research shows that Gen Z’s nostalgia influences real-world behavior, too. Many are buying analog media like vinyl records at high rates, often for aesthetic or emotional reasons as much as sound quality. Trends like “flip phone summer,” where young people embraced low-tech devices to escape constant connectivity, point to a broader desire to reduce cognitive overload.

Vogue describes this moment as a collective desire to reconnect with shared culture at a time when online experiences feel increasingly fragmented and overwhelming.

Nostalgia in 2026 isn’t just an aesthetic. It’s an emotional signal, and possibly a coping mechanism. It’s a way of grounding ourselves amid rapid technological change, political uncertainty, global turmoil, and digital overload.

We’re already seeing brands revive early social media aesthetics, artists lean into throwback sounds, and creators frame past eras as symbols of stability and possibility.

The return to 2016 isn’t just escapism but a message.

We’re all craving a lighter internet, culture that feels shared, and a future that feels open and full of possibility. And if this trend is any indication, nostalgia may be one of the defining cultural forces of 2026.

ICYI… I launched the Creator Bill of Rights with Congressman Ro Khanna this week!

Instagram post

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Claude Is Taking the AI World by Storm, and Even Non-Nerds Are Blown Away

• Tired of AI, people are committing to the analog lifestyle in 2026

• AI companies will fail. We can salvage something from the wreckage | Cory Doctorow

• Dearborn's AI-powered school bus traffic enforcement starts Monday

• The Sunday Daily: Hollywood’s A.I. Moment

• China will clinch the AI race

Creator Economy

• Apple lanches apple creator studio 

• FAQ on the creator economy: How marketers can stand out in 2026

• The creator economy may be bigger than we think, and taxing side hustles will be a growing issue

• 3 creator economy trends that helped startups pull in millions from investors heading into 2026

• Fair and Future-Proof: Europe’s Creator Economy in Focu

Web3 

• Senators vow to revive crypto bill

• How Crypto Is Used for Political Corruption

• Is This Billionaire a Financial Genius or a Fraudster?

• Crypto industry turns against US bill it had pushed to regulate digital assets

• The Eric Adams Crypto Scandal Is Getting Messier

🎧 New Episode of The AI Download: A ‘Best of’ the AI Download Season 1

This special episode, I’m closing out Season One of The AI Download by revisiting the conversations that shaped our exploration of AI, creativity, and what it means to be human right now. Across more than 40 episodes, I spoke with founders, investors, policymakers, market insiders, and cultural voices who helped cut through the hype to unpack how AI is actually changing work, markets, identity, and responsibility.

From Mark Cuban on using AI as leverage to Sinead Bovell reframing AI as a structural shift in our reality, this Best Of episode captures the insights that mattered most and sets the foundation for the questions we’ll carry into Season Two.

Youtube
Spotify
Apple

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

Hey Alpha Fam,

I’m just coming off an incredible trip to Dubai, where I emceed at the Billion Followers Summit. I’ll be sharing deeper takeaways and insights from the conference in next week’s newsletter.

What surprised me most? AI wasn’t actually the central conversation and honestly, that was a refreshing change.

Contrast that with CES, where AI was very much center stage. While quantum computing continues inching forward, let’s be real: it’s harder to explain and far less “sexy” for mainstream audiences.

At CES, AI was everywhere. In homes, cars, robots, wearables, chips, and assistants promising to be more personal, more helpful, and more present. At the same time, the recent Grok situation has become a serious warning sign of what happens when powerful AI tools are released without sufficient safeguards.

The Grok situation is serious and it is not just a PR problem

Grok’s image generation features were widely used to create and circulate sexualized and non-consensual images of real people. The tool made it too easy to manipulate photos, respond publicly, and spread harmful content at scale.

This triggered immediate backlash and real consequences.

xAI moved to restrict Grok’s image generation after widespread criticism. Governments even stepped in. Malaysia temporarily restricted access to Grok following concerns over misuse. India reportedly pressed X on moderation failures related to Grok-generated content, leading to takedowns and enforcement actions.

It’s clear that this isn’t about regulating innovation here, this is about a system being released without protections strong enough to prevent predictable harm.

The key issue regulators and critics keep pointing to is this. While there will always be learnings when a product goes live, relying on user reporting after harm occurs is no longer acceptable. Especially when the product is capable of generating realistic images of real people and distributing them instantly through a viral platform. 

Once something trends, the damage is already done.

The Grok situation highlights a larger problem across the industry. AI tools are being shipped quickly, often framed as playful or experimental, without being designed for how people actually behave online.

If an AI system can edit or generate images of real people, consent and safety have to be built in at the point of creation. Not added later. Not handled through moderation clean-up.

This is especially true on social platforms where visibility, replies, and virality are core features.

That means these tools shouldn’t ship without clear guardrails, stress-testing for misuse, and baseline certification standards, the same way we expect from products that impact public safety.

CES 2026 showed how deeply AI is moving into daily life

CES 2026 was a clear signal that AI is no longer just software, It is becoming physical, invisible by design, and embedded into everyday systems.

These major themes were consistent across the show.

AI is moving onto devices through on-device processing and dedicated AI chips. It is becoming embodied through robots and physical systems. And it is being positioned as an always-on layer across homes, cars, health, and work.

NVIDIA leaned heavily into this vision, framing AI as infrastructure that powers everything from data centers to robotics and autonomous systems. Samsung talked about AI companions that live across devices and environments. LG introduced its idea of “Affectionate Intelligence,” where AI senses, thinks, and acts in physical spaces.

Robots were everywhere. Not just as concepts, but as products meant to interact with people directly.

The message from CES was clear: AI is moving closer to us, into our spaces, our routines, and more intimate parts of life.

Trust is now the product

This is where CES and Grok collide.

The more present AI becomes, the higher the cost of failure. A chatbot mistake is annoying. A system that can be used to harass, exploit, or humiliate real people at scale is dangerous.

As AI becomes embedded into physical environments and social platforms, trust is no longer a nice-to-have; it is the product.

Companies cannot treat safety as a policy document or a reporting form. It has to be designed into how the system works from the start.

That includes limits, friction, consent checks, and clear boundaries around real people and real images.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Google Bets on AI-Based Shopping With New AI Agents for Retailers

• Kroger, Papa Johns Test Gemini AI Agents for Retail

• Hands-on with Bee, Amazon’s latest AI wearable

• This CEO laid off nearly 80% of his staff because they refused to adopt AI fast enough. 2 years later, he says he’d do it again

• AI can now 'see' optical illusions. What does it tell us about our own brains?

• The Dangerous Paradox of A.I. Abundance

• Hyperscale AI data centers: 10 Breakthrough Technologies 2026

Creator Economy

• TikTok Trends That Defined 2025 (Whether You Liked Them or Not)

• Why The Creator Economy Is Now Wall Street-Ready

• Creator economy M&A is 'back, baby.' Here's where an advisor thinks the deal heat will be in 2026.

• Social media follower counts have never mattered less, creator economy execs say

• Rumble and Tether Launch Crypto Wallet for Creator Economy

• Estate Planners Navigate New Terrain with Creator Economy

Web3 

• Lawmakers are preparing to try again on major crypto bill. Why it matters and what happens next

• Dubai bans privacy token use on exchanges, tightens stablecoin rules in crypto reset

• Warren Presses SEC Over Crypto Risk as Trump Pushes Crypto Into Retirement Plans

• Pitching Crypto and Needling Mamdani: Adams’s Post-Mayoralty Takes Shape

• Maduro’s Crypto-Backed Oil Deals Put Tether at Center of Venezuela Money Drama

• Coinbase Raises Pressure as Crypto Bill Moves to Senate Markup

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

Hey Alpha Fam,

If 2025 taught creators anything, it’s that the systems we build on are fragile. Not broken, but constantly changing.

Algorithms shift and monetization rules change quietly. Plus, AI content is flooding feeds faster than anyone can process it. Attention, which already felt scarce, keeps getting more expensive.

In 2026, the creators who win won’t just be great storytellers, a skill that publications like The Wall Street Journal are now noting companies are actively recruiting for. They’ll be smart operators running real businesses, and people who understand how attention turns into trust, and how trust eventually turns into income.

They’ll also need internal skills like resilience and flexibility, something Kudzi Chikumbu from Tubi recently pointed out. Because even the best strategy only works if you can adapt when the ground moves.

Here are the creator trends I’m watching this year, and what they look like in practice.

1. Human signal becomes the most valuable currency

AI-generated content is everywhere, from faceless videos and cloned voices to auto-generated commentary. Some investors are even arguing that AI will make creators less valuable, not more.

Whether or not you agree, that belief is already shaping platforms and budgets. What cuts through isn’t louder content or copying what already works, but clearer human signal. The new “authenticity” is actually leaning into your lived experience and genuine passions, taste and aesthetic, as well as owning your mistakes as lessons.

Formats that involve presence and perspective like live conversations, reporting from the ground, expert interviews, or genuinely community-led work, are harder to fake and easier to trust in an increasingly automated feed.

What to do: have the courage to post before making it perfect, and build at least one format that makes it obvious why you are the one telling this story.

2. Short-form video becomes more like television

Short-form isn’t going away, but it is changing. Instagram Reels generated an estimated $10 billion in ad revenue in 2024, according to Meta disclosures and reporting from The Information. That scale changes how platforms think. 

Creators who approach short-form like episodic media, with recurring formats, recognizable beats, and a sense of continuity, are consistently outperforming those chasing one-off viral moments. Either way, shorts still matter for discovery.

You can see this mindset showing up inside creator-led companies too. When MrBeast hired for a Head of Viral Marketing role, it underscored something creators already know: distribution is no longer luck or instinct. It’s a discipline.

At the same time, long-form hasn’t lost its pull. Podcasts continue to command deep attention and budgets, and with platforms like Netflix entering the space, the line between digital media and “real” media is basically gone. YouTube now rivals traditional TV in reach, highlighted by its latest power-move partnership with the Oscars. 

This isn’t a short-form versus long-form moment. It’s a full media stack moment.

What to do: focus on consistency and repeatability. Build formats people recognize and return to, and think in seasons rather than posts. Shorts increasingly function like marketing, while podcasts are filling the role talk shows once did.

3. Creators are partners, not performance channels

Brands are increasingly focused on outcomes, and creator-led media spend is growing as a result with companies like Unilever announcing plans to work with tens of thousands of creators. But alongside that growth, more creators are pushing back on being treated like unpaid, results-oriented sales teams. When creators are expected to contribute strategy, creative direction, production, and distribution, performance alone doesn’t reflect the full scope of the work.

What’s emerging instead are longer-term, more embedded relationships. Creator-in-residence roles and extended partnerships are bringing creators in earlier, sometimes before agencies or formal RFPs are involved. These arrangements often include advising and insight alongside content creation, and they work best when creators are treated as collaborators, not just distribution.

When done well, these partnerships reflect reality: many creators are operating as media businesses and subject-matter experts, not just marketing channels.

What to do: negotiate like a business, not a post. Separate compensation for time, expertise, and production from how content is used or amplified, and prioritize longer-term scopes where the work can compound.

4. Income becomes modular, not platform-dependent

Platform payouts keep shifting. YouTube expanded its Shorts revenue sharing, TikTok continues to adjust creator rewards, Instagram experiments with bonuses and payouts, and Facebook is making a quiet comeback with monetization. The pattern is consistent even as the details change: no single stream is stable enough to rely on.

Creators who are building sustainable businesses are stitching together income across multiple sources from platform revenue, newsletters, affiliates, subscriptions, brand partnerships, services, and owned products, so that changes in one area don’t derail everything.

What to do: aim for a mix of revenue streams that gives you leverage. That way, if one platform changes the rules, your business can still function.

5. Compliance becomes part of credibility

The FTC has made it clear that disclosures must be clear and conspicuous. Vague hashtags buried at the end of captions are not enough.

At the same time, the EU Digital Services Act is pushing platforms toward greater transparency and accountability, especially around ads.

This affects creators globally, not just in Europe.

What’s changing beneath the surface is bigger than disclosures. As the industry matures, creators are increasingly being recognized as small businesses rather than hobbyists. From unions and guilds like SAG-AFTRA and the Creator Guild of America, to practical infrastructure being built by companies like The Boring Stuff, there’s growing momentum around clearer scopes of work, usage rights, compensation standards, and mental health considerations.

Credibility now includes how responsibly creators operate and how seriously brands and platforms treat the people they work with. This is also what continues to fuel my work building Creators 4 Mental Health. 

What to do: go beyond basic disclosures. Pay attention to the frameworks emerging from SAG-AFTRA’s Influencer Agreement and the Creator Guild of America’s Rider contract, stay informed about state-level conversations around independent contractor protections, and adopt tools and standards that treat your work like a real business. Transparency and compliance are no longer extras; they’re table stakes.

6. Community outperforms virality

Multiple studies show that creators with smaller, loyal audiences often earn more sustainably than those dependent on viral spikes. That’s because repeat viewers, subscribers, and members build momentum over time in a way virality usually doesn’t.

We’re also seeing continued growth among B2B and education creators, especially on platforms like LinkedIn, where what you know is what creates value. In these spaces, influence is built through clarity, consistency, and usefulness rather than reach alone, and community forms around shared problems, not trends.

For many creators, this kind of influence looks less like “going viral” and more like becoming a trusted resource people return to. It’s also why academics and subject-matter experts are starting to find real traction on TikTok and Instagram. As fatigue around the influencer lifestyle sets in, learning and perspective are creating a different kind of value.

What to do: serve a specific audience well. Build one weekly touchpoint your audience can reliably count on, engage where you already show up, learn how to respond to timely moments through your own lens, and let your community grow from there.

7. Creator ecosystems decentralize

Creator hubs are no longer limited to Los Angeles or New York. Miami, Austin, Atlanta, and international cities are becoming meaningful centers for collaboration and deal-making. This shift opens the door to local-first partnerships, regional brand activations, and IRL moments that translate online.

What to do: lean into where you are and what you have access to. Become a signal for your region instead of chasing someone else’s scene.

8. Owned media becomes non-negotiable

Platform volatility is not new, but the stakes are higher. Even mainstream business publications are warning creators about over-reliance on algorithms.
Newsletters, SMS lists, and owned websites are not optional anymore, they are insurance. 

What to do: make growing an owned audience a core KPI, not a side project.

9. Live shopping turns creators into conversion engines

If you follow Gary Vaynerchuk, all he can talk about is this!

Instagram post

Live shopping is no longer experimental. Platforms are leaning into it because it collapses the funnel: content, community, and commerce in one moment. It’s also a clear monetization pathway and keeps users on these apps for WAY longer.

Creators who already have trust are uniquely positioned here. Live formats reward real-time interaction, product knowledge, and credibility, not just reach. This is especially true in beauty, wellness, fashion, and home.

Platforms like TikTok and Whatnot are where a lot of this experimentation is happening, and the creators who thrive there tend to feel different. They’re less “influencer posting a link” and more like a modern QVC host, part entertainer, part product expert, part community builder.

What to do: approach live shopping as a format, not a feature. Treat it like a show, but also like FaceTime or a hangout with people who already trust you. Give viewers reasons to stay, participate, and come back. One well-run live can outperform weeks of passive affiliate links.

10. IRL becomes a force multiplier, not a replacement

The online world is only getting noisier. As a result, creators who pair strong digital presence with real-world proximity will have an advantage.

This does not mean big conferences or massive events. Smaller, more intimate gatherings like dinners, workshops, salons, and private communities, are becoming deal flow and community growth engines. Brands want creators who feel trusted and known, not just seen.

Some people are calling this an offline or analog renaissance. What it really reflects is a loss of default trust in online systems, combined with growing fatigue. From Gen Alpha to early tech adopters, people are becoming more skeptical of feeds, platforms, and automated experiences they once relied on without question.

At the same time, a growing body of research continues to show the impact of constant screen time and social media on mental health. This shift is not anti-technology. It is a search for signal and sustainability. In a more automated and noisy digital environment, trust is moving back toward people, presence, and proof.

What to do: invest in small, intentional IRL moments that reinforce your online work. The combination compounds trust and leads to higher-quality, longer-term deals.

Hot take:

The real shift in 2026

The throughline here is simple: creators are no longer just creators. They’re media companies, operators, and small businesses navigating an industry that’s rapidly growing up.

And in the middle of all that change, standing out isn’t only about chasing the next format or platform shift. Sometimes it comes from doing the opposite, slowing down, getting clearer on what you actually care about, and building from there. The creators who know themselves, on and offline, are often the ones best positioned to adapt when everything else moves.

Where to find me next…

1 Billion Followers Summit in Dubai

I’ll be emceeing the Creator Economy Stage from January 8-11. If you’re there, come say hi!

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Forget all the bubble talk — here's why you need to own AI stocks in 2026

• Watch: BBC reporter tests AI anti-shoplifting tech

• Indonesia’s Sovereign AI Play

• Amazon’s AI assistant comes to the web with Alexa.com

• The AI supercycle tests the world's network infrastructure

• World ‘may not have time’ to prepare for AI safety risks, says leading researcher

• AI-driven inflation is 2026's most overlooked risk, investors say

Creator Economy

• TikTok Trends That Defined 2025 (Whether You Liked Them or Not)

• 3 creator economy trends that helped startups pull in millions from investors heading into 2026

• The new rules of creator reach: algorithms and AI fatigue

• The Creator Economy Has a Mental Health Crisis and the Data Is No Longer Ignorable

• WATCH: 2025’s Creator Economy Winners and Losers

Web3 

• PwC ‘leans in’ to crypto as Trump and lawmakers embrace sector

• Crypto exchanges Coinbase (COIN) and eToro (ETOR) switch places at Goldman Sachs

• Crypto Users Face Home Invasions as Physical Attacks Double

• Crypto stocks surge as bitcoin refuses to go down in 2026

• Trump Pardoned 3 Crypto Felons In 10 Months—Here's What Each One Cost 

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude,

The future is probably not as scary as you think. It will just take more brain cells than most of us want to spend.

That line from educator and 70k+ Substack writer Nate Jones has been stuck in my head since we recorded this week’s episode of The AI Download. So this is my attempt to make sense of what’s coming. Not the hype version. The reasonable, hopeful, and realistic one.

These are the ten AI shifts I expect to define 2026.

1. Chatbots fade into the background

Nate said it clearly during our conversation: “The chatbot use case is saturated.”

Meaning the magic will not come from typing into a box anymore. It will come from AI living quietly inside the tools you already use. You will stop thinking of AI as a separate space and start noticing it as a layer in docs, email, spreadsheets, browsers, and devices. Invisible but powerful.

2. You don’t need to learn to code, but you do need to know how to talk to machines properly

Claude Opus 4.5 and no code builders like Lovable can now turn instructions into functioning apps. The challenge becomes expressing your intent clearly. Nate reminded me that when most people try to build something, they suddenly hit all the questions they never knew existed. “Oh no, I have to deploy. What is deployment?”

A little fluency goes a long way.

Researchers at Stanford University and industry leaders have repeatedly shown that productivity gains from AI don’t come from raw access, but from basic literacy, knowing how systems work well enough to ask better questions and spot gaps before they break your workflow.

Here’s a link to some free courses available to help you build this muscle in the new year.

3. Agents become a quiet flex

In 2025, agents were demoed and released by every major company. In 2026, they start living real lives. Some people will run research agents that summarize filings and news every morning. Some will delegate marketing workflows. Some will automate travel planning and renewals.

The early adopters who delegate first will widen the productivity gap. They stop spending time on research, scheduling, reporting, and coordination, and reallocate that time to decisions, creativity, and strategy. That compounding advantage is the story of 2026.

4. Text to video hits the mainstream through ads first 

Sora terrified Hollywood, but advertisers will be the ones to take over our feeds with AI video. Meta is already pushing AI ad creation, including more customization and personalization.

Platforms want a world where a small business owner can produce twenty localized video ads, test them quickly, and scale the winners. When spectacle becomes cheap, taste and curation start to matter more than budget.

5. Open models and on device AI make everything feel alive

DeepSeek also reminded us that “cheap” isn’t the whole story. What matters is efficiency and distribution. Pair that with Google baking Gemini into Android phones, and suddenly every surface becomes a smart surface. You will not choose the model. It will be everywhere automatically.

6. Hollywood and music adapt faster than expected

There will still be outrage and fear. We saw some of that this year. But the business reality is shifting. Disney already signaled interest in licensing IP for AI video generation. And on the podcast, we compared the studio acceptance of AI to the rise of autotune. As I noted, “It is a bit like autotune except on steroids.”

The value of liveness and real presence goes up, not down. If anything, “real” becomes the premium tier.

7. Copyright fights settle into payouts instead of philosophy

The proposed Anthropic settlement suggests the new default. If a company uses legally acquired works for training, it becomes easier to defend. If the data was scraped from pirated copies, it will cost money. Companies will shift from the rhetoric of disruption to the accounting of licensing.

8. AI slop and misinformation deepen the trust crisis

This is not about deepfakes. It is about confirmation bias. Nate said something subtle and wise: “We have an appetite to be fooled by what we want to believe.”

AI does not invent manipulation. It accelerates it. So media literacy becomes survival, not curriculum.

9. The sustainability debate grows up

The doom headlines ignore important nuance. Data centers use water and electricity, but the water footprint is tiny compared to agriculture or golf courses. The real challenge is the energy mix and siting. If you want a livable planet and functioning AI systems, the practical conversation becomes where and how we build renewable infrastructure.

10. Education falls behind, but individuals accelerate

Schools still do not know what to do with AI, but students already use it daily. The gap between policy and reality widens. The people who win next year will not wait for permission. They will teach themselves by building projects, collaborating online, and treating AI fluency as a lifelong skill, not a semester course.

The winners will treat AI and their own work like a gym membership: small reps, every week, for years.

So, should we all be afraid of the future of AI?

I’m not. I’m tired some days, overwhelmed others. I relate to Nate saying his brain feels like it’s “smoking at the ears.” But I also keep coming back to his original point: the future is probably not as scary as you think. It just asks more of us than we want to give.

My takeaway for 2026 is simple: don’t outsource your understanding. You don’t have to become an engineer, but you do have to become fluent enough to make good calls. The people who thrive next year won’t be the ones who chase every shiny tool. They’ll be the ones who build a few smart systems, develop taste, and stay curious.

If you want the episode recap and the full list of links and tools we mentioned, reply “energy” and I’ll send it your way. And if one of these shifts made you pause, hit reply and tell me which one. I read every note.

Other headlines to check out:

AI

• Bernie Sanders criticizes AI as ‘the most consequential technology in humanity’

• More than 20% of videos shown to new YouTube users are ‘AI slop’, study find

• Humanity May Reach Singularity Within Just 4 Years, Trend Shows

• Experts warn AI is making your brain work less

• Nvidia buying AI chip startup Groq's assets for about $20 billion in its largest deal on record

• 40 of our most helpful AI tips from 2025

Creator Economy

• In Graphic Detail: Here’s what the creator economy is expected to look like in 2026

• These 13 creator economy startups pulled in about $2 billion in funding this year

• AMFM Technologies unveils Bold Mini device and ownership platform as Jacksonville pushes into creator economy

• Creator Economy Takes Center Stage At February 2026 Industry Gatherings

• UK's Hero Brands growing via 'creator economy'

Web3 

• MEET48’s 2026 Roadshow Successfully Held in Seoul, Unveiling Multiple Products to Lead the Global AI + Web3 Entertainment Industry

• European Council expands digital euro scope to business payments and Web3

• The ugly memes driving crypto sales

• Crypto market predictions for 2026: Coinbase Institutional highlights the next big things

• North Korea stole a record amount of crypto—again: report estimates its hackers’ 2025 haul at $2 billion

Remember, I'm Bullish on you! With gratitude and Happy Holidays!