
Is Snap The Most Underrated Platform For Creators Right Now?
Snap doesn't make a lot of noise. While other platforms race to dominate the creator economy through funds, feeds, and increasingly similar features, Snap has quietly taken a different approach — one rooted in intimacy, visual communication, and, more recently, a long-term bet on wearables and AR.
But whether that contrarian vision is enough to earn a more central place in the creator economy remains an open question.
In a rare, thoughtful interview on The Diary of a CEO podcast with Steven Bartlett, Snap CEO Evan Spiegel laid out his vision for what a healthier, more human internet could look like. It's a compelling alternative to the social platforms we've grown used to — and one that challenges some of the assumptions the creator economy has been built on.
Snapchat opens to the camera — not a content feed. That's a philosophical one.
'We wanted people to focus on creating rather than consuming,' Spiegel told Bartlett. 'That small design choice has enormous consequences.'
Unlike other platforms built around public validation, Snap avoids features like visible like counts and public comment threads. 'We made a very conscious decision not to have likes and comments,' he explained. 'Because that creates an environment of comparison and pressure, and that's not what we're about.'
While this approach may be more psychologically sound, it has also meant Snap often feels out of step with how creators typically grow audiences and monetize content today. For creators conditioned to optimize for reach, Snap's quieter, more personal design can feel like a harder path — even if it may ultimately be a healthier one.
Spiegel revealed in the Bartlett interview that Snap's monetization tools have come a long way — and that the company is now paying out significant money to creators and publishers. 'We're doing over half a billion dollars in creator payouts a year,' he said.
That number was echoed in another recent conversation Spiegel had on The Colin and Samir Show, where he elaborated on Snap's expanding revenue share model across both Stories and Spotlight. It's allowed creators like Alyssa McKay to use Snapchat as a springboard for building seven-figure product businesses — and homegrown voices like Brooke Monk to turn daily Snap posts into full-time creative careers.
Still, Snap's monetization infrastructure is less mature than YouTube's or even TikTok's. Spiegel acknowledges this: 'We've had to get really good at saying no,' he told Bartlett, referencing features like Snap's discontinued mini-games platform. 'It just wasn't going to be a big business.'
That discipline has kept Snap focused — but it's also limited how aggressively it's chased creator mindshare.
Perhaps Snap's most compelling argument in favor of its model is the relationship users have with it. In the Bartlett interview, Spiegel pointed to third-party academic research showing that Snapchat, unlike its rivals, may actually improve users' well-being.
'There was a study out of the Netherlands,' he said. 'And it found that Snapchat actually promotes well-being and supports your relationships. There were no negative mental health implications of using Snapchat — but there were for Instagram and TikTok.'
The product is intentionally designed to foster private communication and limit performative sharing. 'Snap is about your relationships, not your profile,' Spiegel explained. 'We're not building for popularity contests.'
That design principle makes Snap different — and potentially better — for creators looking to foster real loyalty and community. But it also means Snap often gets left out of the conversation when it comes to rapid audience growth and influencer virality.
Where Snap is arguably ahead of the curve is in its long-running investment in wearables and AR.
'Screens have been our interface with computers for decades,' Spiegel told Bartlett. 'But I think pretty soon, they're going to be much more immersive in the world.'
He spoke passionately about Snap's AR glasses — Spectacles — and how they're not just a gadget, but a philosophical statement about the future of technology.
'We should have a lot more ambition for what computers are,' he said. 'I want to be sitting at home, look out the window, and see our four kids running around outside… wearing glasses, playing together, doing something fun that teaches them something.'
Snap is one of the few major companies betting that the future of computing will move off screens and into our physical surroundings. It's a bold, long-term play — and one that could reshape what creation and connection look like for the next generation of creators.
Snap is not the loudest player in the creator economy. It isn't the most lucrative for the biggest influencers. But it's building one of the few platforms with a coherent, long-term product philosophy — one that puts well-being and human connection above metrics and manipulation.
That doesn't guarantee success. As Spiegel himself acknowledged to Colin and Samir, 'We've just found that if we can stay focused on delivering value for our community... ultimately over time, the market comes around.'
Maybe it will. As creators grapple with burnout, algorithm changes, and regulatory threats (particularly around TikTok), Snap's slower, more human-first approach may become more appealing.
At the very least, it's worth a closer look.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles

Los Angeles Times
an hour ago
- Los Angeles Times
What will happen to food assistance under Trump's tax cut plan? A look at the numbers
President Trump's plan to cut taxes by trillions of dollars could also trim billions in spending from social safety net programs, including food assistance for lower-income people. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the 'One Big Beautiful Bill Act' to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. Here's a look at the food assistance program, by the numbers: The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law eliminated a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the country. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but the Trump administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion in federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come from shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come from expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't do so are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. The combined effect of those changes is projected by the CBO to reduce SNAP participation by a monthly average of 3.2 million people. The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures are unlikely to serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. The House resolution containing the SNAP changes and tax cuts passed last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food assistance and Medicaid and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it. Lieb writes for the Associated Press.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Saving for a storm while it's already raining: Florida readies budget fund to offset federal cuts
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (WFLA) — With growing signs of a financial squeeze from Washington, including potential cuts to Medicaid, SNAP, and FEMA, Florida lawmakers are preparing not just for state budget cuts but also for uncertainty in D.C. The state relies on federal dollars for nearly one-third of its budget and any disruptions from D.C. could have a ripple effect here on the state level. So, the question is, are lawmakers doing enough to protect Floridians from the unexpected?'I do not believe in raising taxes. We agree in the opposite. Cutting taxes, cutting spending, wasteful spending,' said House Speaker Danny Perez (R-Miami). 'What we're doing is, we are putting the state in a position that, god forbid, we are in a recession, we are in the 2000s all over again, we have a budget stabilization fund that would be able to backstop and protect Floridians from having to be in an uncomfortable position.' Senate and House leadership say they are leaning on the budget stabilization fund, the state's rainy day reserve, in case of a recession, rising costs, or federal pull-back. 'We're doing things to make Florida's balance sheet more durable and difficult times, and we're setting more money aside to have as rainy-day reserves if things get difficult, that's a win that's a win,' said Senate President Ben Albritton (R-Wauchula). But not everyone at the statehouse agrees that leadership's strategy is hitting the right mark.'You don't get to talk about saving money for a rainy day when it's still raining, when it's already raining on the people of Florida,' said State Rep. Fentrice Driskell (D-Tampa). House Minority Leader Driskell said we shouldn't be cutting funding, we should be expanding the budget. 'It seems to me there's a lot of hot air about this Budget Stabilization Fund. There's a lot of hot air about saving money for a rainy day. But guess what? You only get to do that after you've met all of your other obligations,' said Driskell. 'The question is, do I believe this budget prepares Florida for what could be coming out of the DOGE cuts or just the changes that come out of Washington, D.C? And I would say yes,' said Senate President Albritton. It's now day 102 of the 60-day session, and Budget Chairs have been working all week, racing to finalize the final spending plan, which is now expected for a Monday vote. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
House Budget Bill Targets $300B in SNAP Cuts — 4 Potential Impacts To Benefits
Americans who depend on food stamps to help them buy groceries could see their benefits slashed if Congress passes President Trump's budget bill, which he personally dubbed the 'Big Beautiful Bill.' Find Out: Read Next: The bill certainly includes big cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a federal program that helps about 40 million Americans buy healthy food, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). The U.S. House passed a version of the bill in late May that includes nearly $300 billion in SNAP cuts, according to a report from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP), which cited Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates. The bill is now being weighed by the Senate, where it's expected to face a tougher fight. A few key Republican senators have voiced opposition to the House version. However, as USA Today reported, much of that opposition has to do with a desire to cut more spending from the bill, protect certain energy subsidies or avoid slashing Medicaid funding. There is little, if any, GOP opposition to cutting SNAP benefits, at least publicly. The SNAP cuts do face plenty of opposition from advocacy groups, though. Jason Gromley, Senior Director for Share Our Strength and its No Kid Hungry campaign, called the bill 'a vote to increase childhood hunger.' 'This proposal reflects the largest and most extreme cuts to SNAP in history,' Gromley said in a press release. 'These cuts will do nothing to improve the lives of Americans, and will make it even harder for those who do receive benefits to afford enough food to feed their families.' According to the CBPP, here are four ways the proposed cuts will impact SNAP benefits. More than 2 million children will see food assistance to their families either 'cut substantially' or ended altogether. That figure is based on CBO estimates of the bill's SNAP provisions impact. It doesn't include provisions that prevent future benefit increases, which will impact all SNAP recipients. Warren Buffett: As the CBPP noted, under current SNAP rules, adults without children in their homes are limited to three months of benefits out of every three years if they can't prove that they either meet a 20-hour-per-week work requirement, or are exempt from the requirement. The House bill would expand the restriction to parents of children over the age of 6, and to older adults aged 55 to 64. Expanding the work requirement would cut SNAP by $92 billion through 2034, according to the CBO. It also would take food assistance away 'entirely' from 3.2 million adults in a typical month. One result is that about 1 million children would see their food benefits reduced substantially. The House bill would cut federal spending on school lunches and breakfasts by $700 million, according to the CBO. This would affect about 420,000 children in an average month by ending their school meals and/or cutting off their summer SNAP payments. The House bill also would eliminate all SNAP assistance for up to 250,000 foreign-born residents — including roughly 50,000 children — who are legal residents of the U.S. Many are refugees and people granted asylum who've proven to have fled violence and persecution in other countries, according to the CBPP. More From GOBankingRates 4 Affordable Car Brands You Won't Regret Buying in 2025 This article originally appeared on House Budget Bill Targets $300B in SNAP Cuts — 4 Potential Impacts To Benefits