The digital revolution promised a creative renaissance. In Australia, that promise has materialised—in part. Millions of Australians now produce and monetise content across YouTube, TikTok, Instagram, Substack, Patreon, and OnlyFans. Barriers to entry have been flattened, tools are free or cheap, and audiences are accessible without a publisher, gallery, or broadcaster standing in the way.
But behind the glossy headlines and viral hits lies a market struggling with the fundamentals: income inequality, algorithmic instability, exploitative platforms, and patchy regulatory frameworks. Australia may have entered the permissionless economy, but the real question is: is it working for most creators?
This piece argues that creative freedom in Australia has outpaced creative sustainability, and that without policy intervention, the nation risks turning its booming creator economy into another case study in digital extraction—where platforms profit and creators struggle.
A Nation of Creators: The Numbers Are Real
Over the last five years, Australia has become one of the most active creator economies per capita in the world. According to Adobe’s Future of Creativity study, Australia added more than 3 million new creators between 2020 and 2022—up 48% in just two years. Nearly a quarter of Australians now identify as creators, and 48% of them monetise their content.
The industry’s cultural and economic footprint is significant. As reported by Creative Australia, over 714,000 Australians work in the creative economy, representing almost 6% of the national workforce. Digital creators—spanning influencers, streamers, educators, and entertainers—have been the fastest-growing sub-sector within that ecosystem.
Meanwhile, platforms have embedded themselves in daily life:
- Australians now spend over 6 hours online per day, with nearly 2 hours on social media, according to Meltwater’s Digital 2024 Australia report.
- TikTok has between 8 and 8.5 million active users locally.
- Oxford Economics estimates TikTok contributes over $1.1 billion to Australian GDP annually and supports 13,000 jobs.
The infrastructure of a permissionless creative economy is clearly in place. But the wealth it generates is far from evenly distributed.
Monetisation: High Hopes, Harsh Realities
The top end of Australia’s creator economy looks like a success story. Influencers earning six figures, creators selling out arenas or books, and OnlyFans performers buying real estate dominate headlines.
But beneath that are thousands struggling to convert engagement into stability.
A 2024 report by Supercreator shows that just 1% of creators account for more than one-third of total revenue across platforms like TikTok, YouTube, and OnlyFans. The remaining 99% face fragmented income, inconsistent monetisation policies, and rising cost-of-living pressures.
This bifurcation is reinforced by tax complexity. One high-profile example is Adelaide-based OnlyFans creator Gabby Goessling, who was hit with a surprise $172,000 GST bill after exceeding the $75,000 earnings threshold without realising the implications. While the ATO insists on compliance, creators argue that policy hasn’t kept pace with platform economics.
Even those who do earn are playing on uneven terrain. As platforms centralise power, creators increasingly rely on algorithmic decisions they don’t control—and often don’t understand.
Minor shifts in TikTok’s recommendation system or YouTube’s monetisation rules can wreak havoc on reach and revenue overnight. A creator may go from 1 million monthly views to 50,000, without a single change in their content.
This supports a key point made in “The Economics of Expression”, which argues that creators have exchanged gatekeepers for algorithms—and in doing so, have lost both stability and leverage. Australian creators, like their global peers, are beholden to foreign-owned platforms whose incentives rarely align with creator welfare.
And now, regulatory pressure is mounting. Australia’s federal government recently passed legislation banning users under 16 from TikTok, Instagram, and Facebook, citing safety and data concerns (source). While the intent is child protection, the impact on younger creator audiences and platform engagement will be real.
A Model Worth Revisiting: The Kinports Framework
It was in 2018 that Nicholas Kinports published his early warning shot, “Permission to Create”, declaring that the era of creative gatekeeping was over. In his 2025 follow-up for Gigabeat, “The Permissionless Economy”, Kinports refined his thesis—acknowledging that while the barriers to entry had collapsed, creators were still trapped by opaque, exploitative systems.
Australian data affirms Kinports’ arc. The tools and platforms have enabled permissionless participation. But they’ve done little to ensure permissionless prosperity. As Kinports suggests, the challenge now is to rebalance value capture—ensuring creators see fair returns for the audiences and economies they generate.
What Australia Must Do Next
Australia has the opportunity—and arguably the obligation—to lead globally in creator economy reform. We already have the infrastructure, the talent, and the market size to act as a creative testbed.
Here are four actionable policy interventions:
1. Modernise Tax Treatment for Creators
Introduce a tiered GST regime for digital creators that recognises the volatile, non-salaried nature of content earnings. Retroactive tax enforcement—as seen in the Goessling case—undermines trust and encourages offshore operations.
Require platforms to publish localised payout and engagement data. Without visibility into algorithm performance and compensation rates, creators cannot make informed decisions or hold platforms accountable.
3. Extend the News Bargaining Code to Creators
Australia’s News Media Bargaining Code forced Google and Meta to negotiate with publishers. Why not apply the same logic to platforms profiting from creator-generated content?
4. Fund Domestic Creator Grants
Expand existing arts grants to include digital-first creators. Programs under Create NSW, Screen Australia, or a new Creative Digital Fund could provide the startup capital needed for long-term creator sustainability.
Final Thought: From Freedom to Fairness
Australia’s creator economy is no longer emerging—it’s entrenched. But while participation is widespread, prosperity is not. Without structural support, the country’s creative class risks becoming a digital underclass: free to create, but bound to platforms that profit disproportionately.
Kinports was right to celebrate the fall of traditional gatekeepers. But now, Australian policymakers must ensure that freedom comes with fairness. A truly permissionless economy must not only let people create—it must let them thrive.
