[flipbrad]

Something so grim should be accompanied by its citation, just so we can check it's not a windup

[culi]

I didn't wanna cite the Fortune article I got it from because it cited research from a group called "Whop" that didn't have the full data available. But here's the article I read

https://fortune.com/article/gen-alpha-dream-careers-youtuber...

EDIT: now that I'm looking more into it, I think this YouGov poll was the original source https://today.yougov.com/technology/articles/39997-influence...

I do vaguely recall a more serious study showing a vast majority of kids thinking "influencer" was a viable career path and a very large portion beleiving it was the only viable career path for them. It also found that these percentages were higher in boys than in girls. That's the study I was trying to find but failed and found this instead

[xnorswap]

two decades ago it would have been:

  1. Movie Star / Actor
  2. TV Star / entertainer

Youtube / tiktok are just the equivalent for that age in this day & age.

[Zetaphor]

One interesting difference is influencer is plausible for a significantly larger population of youth than their legacy equivalents ever were

[culi]

This is probably true and I would be really interested to see a longer-running study with a consistent methodology taking this on

[AuthAuth]

Youtuber is not a grim thing at all. Basically they are saying they aspire to share their hobbies and interests with others in a monetized way.