i don't know when people started calling art content, but i think it has a weird connotation. it seems like such a vague and impersonal way to describe creative work. for that same reason, i don't think it is a helpful term for categorization as it results in different types of creative work being lumped together just because those works happen to be "online." personally, i tend to refer to the things that people brainstorm up and make as "works" because (to me) it's terminology that emphasizes the process and effort that creatives go through in their process of making. in comparison, i think "content" just emphasizes the consumptive quality of works, and speaks solely from a consumerist mindset. when i make things, i just see them as something that i made, rather than something consumed or to be consumed, so the framing of "content" seems alien to me. even when i'm in the role of being appreciator of creative work, i can't say that i just look at most works as "content."


this was inspired by me noticing how "content" snuck into regular people's vocab. i don't shame individuals for it, instead i just see it as a another example of corporate speech and ideas influencing perspectives of everyday life. even creepier? the fact that i can't even tie it down to a singular point of origin in my head, though i think youtube popularized it with how often i've heard youtubers called "content creators" almost everywhere.