Analysis from Claude. Always to be taken with a grain of salt, but maybe some leads in there.

"... venture capital funding contracted, digital advertising consolidated into a duopoly, platforms prioritized algorithmic engagement over creative diversity, regulatory pressures drove risk-averse policies, and educational systems abandoned arts programs—all while audiences developed shortened attention spans in an oversaturated content environment"

https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/0eb4062e-7fd0-43fe-b933-00bd8d889123

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

"Understanding these precursor conditions reveals that creative content stagnation wasn’t an unexpected development but the logical endpoint of policy choices, technological implementations, and market dynamics that prioritized short-term engagement and revenue optimization over long-term creative sustainability. The “writing on the wall” was visible to industry observers by 2017, but the systemic nature of these changes made them difficult for individual creators or even individual platforms to resist. Only by recognizing how these structural forces interconnected can we understand both how creative stagnation became inevitable and what systematic changes would be necessary to reverse it."

Thank you, that's really interesting :)

Most of the time it's hard to tell whether AI is bullshit or not, but isn't that life in general? I like to ask deep questions, and then keep the parts that seem legit. In this case the consolidation of ad networks and their focus on a smaller set of high engagement content seems right

Sounds reasonable :)

The way I got to this document was:

> Did novel content die ~ 2018? Let’s see if we can identify any trends

(Deep Research clarifications)

> Following up on this idea: (your post)

(initial analysis)

> Let’s define a window ENDing in 2018. What trends may have foreshadowed this shift? Were there systemic financial or political changes suggesting a departure from the norm?

(document that I posted)