Recently, I have been following an unnecessary war of narratives about the relationship between CPM and the Creator Economy. In addition to being unproductive, it seems to me to be a misguided battle.
For one group, CPM (cost per thousand impressions) is the cure-all for influencer compensation. For the other, it is a demonic option. But, in fact, the evolution of the Brazilian market has led much more towards the middle path, hybrid. In it, both models work and are complementary. Those who defend the exclusion of one or the other may not be looking at the ecosystem from two fundamental perspectives: that of the brand and the creator. After all, the Creator Economy only works if it is good for the creator and the economy.
CPM is a metric that, with all its limitations, has been essential for the maturation and democratization of the influence market. It brought objective parameters, allowed predictability and opened space for thousands of creators of all sizes to participate economically in this new ecosystem.
Continues after advertising
For micro and nano influencers, CPM is more than a formula — it’s what makes compensation possible in a fair and automated way. In the Brazilian environment, with hundreds of thousands – possibly millions of creators and infinite niches –, these three little letters are the oxygen that keeps the basis of the Creator Economy alive.
And the more the base becomes professional, the more the brands benefit and the end public as well. Furthermore, CPM is not just a metric of scale: in many cases, small creators build smaller but highly engaged communities. The coherence and depth with which they speak to their audiences are often the essence of credibility and the reason for having powerful communities. And that’s worth its weight in gold for brands.
But influence is a complex matter, in which even what cannot be measured in numbers also has a lot of value. Medium and large creators, with years of consistency, public presence and editorial coherence, build a type of asset that escapes calculation by a thousand impressions: the symbolic capital of trust.
Continues after advertising
The same also goes for small creators who are references in their niches. This credibility arises from intangible factors — affective memory, time of presence, coherence between discourse and practice, and cultural legitimacy. She is supported by an emotional bond that guarantees and seals her narratives. For the relationship established with this group, the CPM is not enough. What must prevail is a “brand ambassador” model of fees and contracts, in which the value of deeper and more lasting relationships is recognized.
Therefore, the future of the Creator Economy lies in combining both worlds. The hybrid model recognizes that CPM is fundamental to sustaining the base and scaling the market, while intangible value — translated into reputation, coherence and affection — is what consolidates the top of the influence pyramid.
And I repeat: this relevance at the top is not only in the size of the follower base, but also in the authority on specific topics or the geographic distribution of these digital communities. In practice, this means that a brand can invest in hundreds of micro-influencers per CPM to gain reach and, at the same time, partner with highly credible creators on co-creation projects, long-term narratives or purpose campaigns. And it doesn’t stop there, because there is still a third layer, more related to performance, which is that of affiliates.
Continues after advertising
As if all of this were not enough, there is also a logical question to understand the distinct relationship we have with the top and bottom of the pyramid of influence.
Let’s consider, for example, the research carried out this year by HyperAuditor in partnership with ESPM. She points out that 96.7% of Brazilian influencers present on Instagram have less than 50 thousand followers. In other words, they are among the nano and micro content creators. This represents more than 3 million people. From a pessimistic perspective, let’s say that only 5% of them have the quality desired by brands to carry out partnerships and campaigns.
Still, there are 150 thousand influencers. To work with this group, it is humanly impossible to create “one to one” commercial relationships with everyone, which is why in most cases payment by CPM is the most recommended solution. Therefore, there is also a practical issue in the decision to use this method, and not just a philosophical one as some would have you believe.
Continues after advertising
Agencies are still figuring out how to pay influencers with media dollars. This is an equation that breaks paradigms and flows that have been established for decades. Discussing and understanding people as media outlets is something that does generate some discomfort. After all, it is not an obvious model, although it is the obvious evolution of what has been happening for almost a decade (and which has led to advertising funds flowing into new pockets).
Finally, little by little, the Creator Economy is finding its balance point. When the brand abandons the narrative war once and for all, it will take a big step towards delivering the ideal solution to its three biggest customers: the content creator, the consumer and the brand.
Any discussion that does not offer the best for these three pillars of the Creator Economy will be innocuous and pointless. Because it is always the biggest stakeholders who make this industry go round: those who tell the stories, those who listen to the stories and those who pay the bill hoping that these stories reach the right people.
