By Amaya
How Canada's Content Creators Are Being Exploited
Image by Bianca Van Dijk from Pixabay
“The state of content creation in Canada is at a crossroads. The current model, where PR agencies and wealthy brands exploit the passion and ambition of digital creators, is unsustainable. It is a deliberate choice to devalue a predominantly young and female workforce, cloaked in the language of opportunity.
Content creation is not a hobby; it's a profession. The camera is a tool, the same as a chef's knife or a photographer's lens. The audience is an asset, the same as a newspaper's circulation. It's time for Canadian creators to demand to be treated like the legitimate businesses they are, and for brands to recognize that the most powerful marketing—authentic, creative, and respected—is worth every penny.”
In the bustling digital landscape of Canada, a new class of professional has emerged: the content creator. This broad term encompasses influencers, bloggers, journalists, videographers, and photographers who build audiences and craft compelling narratives. They are the modern-day storytellers. Yet, beneath the glossy surface lies a pervasive and damaging open secret: systemic exploitation, orchestrated by PR agencies, the large, profitable luxury brands they represent, and even the non-profit festivals and organizations that purport to celebrate them.
While models, photographers, caterers, and even the person who sets up the lighting get paid, the content creator—the very individual tasked with broadcasting the brand's message to thousands—is often expected to work for "exposure." This isn't an occasional oversight; it's a calculated business model that devalues creative work and undermines the entire digital economy.
Photo: Canva
The Canadian Content Creation Scene: A Landscape of Passion, Hustle, and Fear
Canada's content creation scene is vibrant and diverse, but it is not Hollywood. Many are self-employed, managing their own businesses, covering their own equipment costs, software subscriptions, healthcare, and taxes. What appears to be a glamorous post is often the result of hours of unpaid labour.
This exploitation is perpetuated by a climate of fear. Many content creators hide their heads in the sand, afraid of the backlash and losing invitations to events. Some even build their image on the fake impression of being "in demand" by accepting every free invitation, prioritizing quantity of "networking" over quality of compensated work. They fear being seen as demanding or difficult and thus accept the unfair system, becoming complicit in their own devaluation. This constant fight for basic professional respect, coupled with financial precarity, takes a significant toll on creators' mental health and creative well-being.
Unlike traditional fields with established unions and rate cards, digital content creation is still fighting for recognition as a legitimate profession. This lack of formalization is the crack through which exploitation seeps in.
The "Exposure" Façade: The Mechanics of the Exploitation
The most common tool of exploitation is the offer of "exposure" or "experience" in lieu of payment. The proposition usually comes from a PR agency, acting as an intermediary for a well-established luxury retailer.
The scenario is familiar:
1. The Invitation: A creator receives a beautifully crafted email invitation to an exclusive boutique opening or a seasonal collection preview.
2. The Bait: The email details all the perks: access to the opulent event, complimentary gourmet food and champagne (provided by a caterer who is, of course, paid), and the promise of a luxurious "gift bag."
3. The Catch: The creator is expected to produce high-quality posts tagging the brand. The word "compensation" is conspicuously absent. Often, the promised gift bag never materializes, making the exchange even more one-sided. In the best-case scenario, the creator receives a product sample—a small token that in no way equates to professional payment for services rendered.
When a creator rightly inquires about payment, the response can be a textbook example of deflection. One such email reply from an agency explicitly stated:
“Unfortunately, we do not compensate any media for attending events – nor are we asked to be compensated by any media house for attendance at events (nor from content creators). Doing so would create bias in the industry.”
If the creator pushes back, the goalposts often shift. The follow-up response typically abandons the "bias" argument and pivots to a new justification, heavy with flattery and industry buzzwords. A subsequent email might read:
“Hello [Name], For clarity, there was no ask to create content. Merely to attend an event and create an authentic relationship with the brand. After all, relationships that are authentic, organic and honest are what drives both relatable and high performing content, cementing long term relationships and opportunities. Best, [Agency Rep]”
Photo: Freepik
“This is where the exploitation becomes clear. The luxury brand has a lavish budget. They paid the PR agency a small fortune to orchestrate an image of exclusivity. They paid the high-end venue, the security staff, the models, the photographers hired to take official pictures, the graphic designers, and the caterers. These professionals submitted invoices and were paid for their services because their work is recognized as having tangible value.The content creator, however, is placed in a different category—not as a service provider, but as a guest who should be grateful for the privilege. The luxury brand and its agency are banking on the creator's desire for association and access to outweigh their need for fair compensation, all while the brand’s products command premium prices that imply a commitment to quality and value—a value denied to the creators.”
The Agency Playbook: A Masterclass in Manipulation
The email exchange doesn't end with a simple "no." It often evolves into a calculated response designed to manipulate, gaslight, and maintain the upper hand. When a creator stands firm, the agency's reply is a textbook example of psychological manipulation, often following this pattern:
1. The Semantic Retreat: When called out for asking for free content, they immediately backtrack. The phrase “For clarity, there was no ask to create content” is a deliberate semantic trick. They reframe their explicit expectation of coverage as a simple, no-strings-attached social invitation, attempting to make the creator’s request for payment seem irrational and out of line.
2. The Weaponization of Buzzwords: They deploy a barrage of flattering industry jargon—“authentic relationship,” “organic,” “honest,” “high performing content.” This language is carefully chosen to appeal to a creator’s desire for legitimacy and belonging, framing the exploitation as a privileged opportunity to be part of an "authentic" inner circle. It's a tactic to make the demand for money seem crass and counter to the creative spirit.
3. The False Barter: They propose a trade that is entirely one-sided: the creator’s time, labour, and audience access in exchange for the promise of “long term relationships and opportunities.” This is a classic tactic. The promised future paid work is a dangling carrot that almost never materializes, but it is effective in getting creators to invest free labour in the present.
4. The Underlying Threat: The entire response is cloaked in a veiled threat. The subtext is clear: if you don’t play along for free now, you will be excluded from both the immediate event and the mythical "long-term opportunities" later. This preys on the creator’s fear of being blacklisted or missing out.
This manipulative response is not a mistake; it is a strategy. It is designed to confuse, flatter, and pressure creators into abandoning their professional standards. It shifts the focus from a fair business transaction to a test of the creator’s "authenticity" and willingness to be a "team player," effectively guilting them into providing free marketing services.
This hypocrisy is often embedded in the agencies' own marketing. Many promote themselves as “modern” “global thinkers” who “believe in a new approach to the media landscape.” Yet, there is nothing modern about a business model reliant on free labour and false arguments about bias. A truly modern approach recognizes content creators as vital, paid partners in the contemporary media ecosystem.
The luxury brand has a lavish budget. They paid the PR agency, the venue, the models, and the photographers. These professionals were paid because their work is recognized as having tangible value. The content creator, however, is treated not as a service provider, but as a guest who should be grateful for the privilege.
Photo: Freepik
The Canadian Factor: A Politer Form of Exploitation?
Some creators argue that the Canadian market is particularly bad for this. The "nice Canadian" stereotype can make it harder to negotiate firmly or call out bad practices for fear of being seen as difficult or ungrateful. The market is also smaller, with fewer competing brands, which can limit a creator's options and bargaining power.
Furthermore, many large brands operating in Canada are subsidiaries of even larger international corporations. The marketing budget for "Canadian initiatives" is often a fraction of the U.S. budget, and paying creators is frequently the first line item to be cut, despite the project moving forward.
A Voice of Fury: A Call to Action
This issue is not new, but it is being called out with increasing fury by established professionals. In a powerful article titled Samples Don’t Pay the Bills: A Quest for Fair Compensation, broadcaster and podcaster Candace Sampson articulates the collective frustration.
She details a common experience: a PR firm representing a national grocery brand (amidst record profits) requested her to promote their message and conduct an interview, offering only free samples in return. She points out the stark imbalance: the influencer, the PR agent, and the agency are all paid; the brand profits. Yet, the creator, who brings a valuable, trusted audience, is asked to work for free.
Sampson dismantles the arguments for free labour, highlighting the significant overhead, time, and skill involved in her work. She argues that the pervasive undervaluation, particularly of women creators, is a reflection of deep societal biases that dismiss their work as a "cute hobby" rather than a profession. Her central question is one every creator and PR professional must answer: “Why should anyone work for free?”
Beyond Brands: The Festival and Organizational Exploitation
Perhaps even more insidious is the exploitation that occurs within the creative industry itself. Certain festivals and cultural entities are often built on the unpaid labour of the very community they serve.
This model is characterized by a stark contradiction. Some festivals proudly proclaim themselves “one of the top in the world” at every opportunity. This boast raises a critical question: what message does it send if a festival with such global aspirations cannot pay the people—the selection committee members, content creators, interns, and consultants—who actively helped to build it?
The testimony from within is telling: countless hours spent over years watching and rating submissions, creating original content, and providing strategic advice, all without compensation. This exploitation is often disguised as an "honour," preying on the genuine passion of artists who want to see their industry flourish.
The priorities are called into question by this practice. Why must the model rely on extravagant, expensive parties to project an image of success? What message does it send when the budget for champagne and canapés at a major festival-side party exists, but the budget for the core team does not? Could the resources be better spent on the stated mission? Could it organize smaller, more meaningful events, foster industry discussions, or put a genuine spotlight on actual emerging filmmakers instead of investing in a glamorous façade?
This practice is a classic case of building castles in the sand—creating an illusion of a thriving enterprise on the foundation of exploited free labour. It is particularly damaging because:
* It Concentrates Benefit: The value generated by the unpaid team flows to the top, benefiting only a few founders or directors, while the workers are left with a line on a resume and empty promises.
* It Undermines the Entire Ecosystem: It sets a dangerous precedent that devalues creative work across the board.
Photo: Freepik
Why This Systemic Exploitation is Unacceptable
This practice goes beyond being simply unfair; it's economically damaging and ethically questionable.
1. It Devalues an Entire Profession: It reinforces the idea that creative digital labour is not real work, creating a race to the bottom.
2. It Favors the Privileged: Only those with independent wealth can afford to consistently work for free, systematically excluding diverse voices.
3. The "Exposure" is Often Worthless: A tag from a brand's or festival's account is rarely a fair exchange for professional labour. Exposure doesn't pay bills.
4. It Creates a Power Imbalance: The power dynamic forces emerging creators to choose between fair pay and career access.
5. It's Simply Bad Business: Entities that do this are building on a weak foundation of resentment and inferior work.
The Path Forward: How to Fix a Broken System
Change must come from all sides. It requires courage from creators and integrity from organizations.
For Content Creators and Industry Professionals:
* Know Your Worth: Your rate card is non-negotiable for for-profit businesses and well-funded organizations. Calculate your worth based on time, overhead, and expertise.
* Learn to Say "No": Politely but firmly decline unpaid offers. "Thank you for the invitation. My rates for [service] are attached. I am unable to donate my professional services at this time."
* Educate the Market: When you decline, briefly explain why. "I'm sure you've paid the venue and the staff for this event. As a professional, I also charge for my services."
* Find Your Voice: Break the culture of fear. Support other creators who speak out. Your collective voice is powerful.
* Unionize and Organize: Support collectives and organizations that share rate information and advocate for fair standards.
Photo: Freepik
For Brands, PR Agencies, and Organizations:
* Budget Ethically: If you have a budget for a party, you must have a budget for the people who create your content and curate your program. If you have a budget for photography, you must have a budget for the people who will distribute the visual and narrative content. It is a non-negotiable line item.
* Transparency: Be honest about budgets. If you are a non-profit, be transparent about where the money goes. If you can’t pay market rate, say so up front.
* Re-evaluate Priorities: Invest in people and programming, not just perception. Support emerging talent directly instead of spending on extravagance.
* Treat Creators as Partners, Not Tools: Collaborate with them. Their understanding of their audience is the expertise you are paying for.
* Pay in Currency, Not Product: Gifted product can be a nice bonus, but it is not payment. You wouldn't pay your caterer in sandwiches.
* Lead the Change: Establish an ethical policy for working with creators. This will attract higher-quality, more professional talent and result in more authentic and effective campaigns.
The Real Cost: We Are Losing Great Talent
This system has a real cost. The Canadian fashion industry has lost amazing, talented bloggers and creators who simply couldn’t afford to work for free anymore. They left because they were tired of being treated unfairly.
The bitter reality was summed up by a former menswear blogger who left the industry disillusioned: “The money is there, it just never makes its way to the creators. Look at the agencies—the owners drive the luxury cars and retreat to their cottages, all while claiming there’s no budget to pay for the very work that fills their portfolios and pads their profits. The system is designed to funnel value upward, leaving those who actually create it with nothing but ‘exposure.’”
The luxury lifestyle of Toronto's PR girls (Photo: Freepik)
Conclusion: Exposure Doesn't Pay the Rent
The state of content creation in Canada is at a crossroads. The current model, where PR agencies, wealthy brands, and even cultural organizations exploit the passion and ambition of digital creators, is unsustainable. It is a deliberate choice to devalue a workforce, cloaked in the language of opportunity.
Content creation is not a hobby; it's a profession. Serving on a selection committee is skilled labour. The camera is a tool, the same as a chef's knife. Critical analysis is expertise, the same as a curator's. It's time for Canadian creators and professionals to demand to be treated like the legitimate businesses and experts they are. The castles built on sand will eventually wash away, but those built on the solid foundation of fair compensation and mutual respect will endure and truly enrich Canada's cultural landscape.
Final Thoughts: A Call for a Functional System
It is crucial to note that this critique is not aimed at the entire industry. There are indeed amazing, forward-thinking PR agencies and brands that treat creators with respect, value their work, and compensate them fairly. These are the partnerships that thrive and produce the best results.
However, the general system remains dysfunctional. Canadian creators must be aware that this is not the global standard. In many other countries, professional content creation is respected as a valid marketing expense, and fair compensation is the norm, not the exception. To accept and normalize working for free is not just personally unsustainable; it is an embarrassment that holds the entire Canadian creative industry back.
This dynamic also calls for a redefinition of leadership within our industry. The real leaders are not necessarily the founders of agencies who expertly portray themselves as powerful community benefactors. True leadership is demonstrated by individuals like Candace Sampson, who use their platform to illuminate fundamental, uncomfortable issues affecting countless creators. It is the willingness to risk industry backlash for the sake of collective progress that is truly admirable and deserving of applause.
The goal is to lift the standard for everyone. By refusing to accept exploitation, creators aren’t just advocating for themselves—they are advocating for a more professional, equitable, and respected industry for all.
Every "no" makes space for a better "yes". Walk away from things that don't serve you. (Photo: Canva)
________________________________________________________________________
Useful Resources for Canadian content creators:
Useful Resources for brands & PR agencies:
No comments:
Post a Comment