As the landscape of social media evolves, a new trend has emerged, where content creators leverage anger to drive engagement and profit. This so-called “rage-baiting” has led influencers like Winta Zesu to generate substantial income by provoking strong emotional responses in their audience.
The Profitability of Rage-Baiting: A New Trend among Online Influencers
The Profitability of Rage-Baiting: A New Trend among Online Influencers
Understanding the intricacies of rage-baiting and its implications in the digital era.
In recent times, Winta Zesu, a 24-year-old content creator, has carved a niche for herself in the realm of rage-baiting, a strategy defined by creating content that intentionally induces anger in viewers. In the past year alone, Zesu amassed an impressive income of $150,000 (£117,000) from her social media endeavors. Unlike traditional influencers who rely on positive reinforcement, Zesu thrives on the vitriol of her commenters. "Every single video of mine that has gained millions of views is because of hate comments,” she explains while sharing her experiences from her New York City apartment.
Zesu's TikTok videos often portray the glamorous life of a model, where her supposed biggest issue is her attractiveness, stirring negative reactions among viewers who critique her demeanor and confidence. "I get a lot of nasty comments, people say ‘you're not the prettiest girl,'" she recounts, highlighting the engagement-driven nature of her content.
This new form of engagement is not to be confused with the traditional clickbait style of engagement, which typically aims to attract viewers through intrigue and is built on a foundation of trust. Marketing podcaster Andrea Jones points out that "rage-baiting content is designed to be manipulative." Human psychology, particularly our inherent bias toward negative stimuli, supports the effectiveness of this method. Dr. William Brady, who studies the interaction of technology with human behavior, asserts that our propensity to pay attention to negative content is deeply ingrained.
As social media platforms ramp up their financial support for creators, including incentivizing engagement through likes and shares, rage-baiting content has surged. Andréa Jones observes, "If we see someone doing something obscene, we may type in the comments ‘this is terrible,’ and that sort of comment is seen as a higher quality engagement by the algorithm.” This financial incentive often drives creators to prioritize shocking or contentious material to maximize views, sometimes at the cost of viewer well-being, which can lead to disconnection from the online environment.
Rage-baiting spans various formats, from contentious celebrity gossip to bizarre food concoctions, but its political implications have become particularly pronounced during this election year. Dr. Brady notes an observable spike in rage-baiting ahead of elections, particularly in the U.S., suggesting that outrage can serve to galvanize political action.
Recent inquiries into the practices on social media platforms have discovered users monetizing content rife with misinformation and sensationalism, often to alarming effects. Experts caution that exposure to excessive negative content can result in disengagement from news and political discourse. Ariel Hazel, an assistant professor at the University of Michigan, emphasizes that “it can be draining to have such high emotions all the time," leading people to turn away from the news altogether.
Concerns also extend to the normalization of outrage outside the digital realm, as algorithms amplify extreme content, rendering it seemingly more prevalent. The small fraction of users pushing politically extreme content can dominate the perception on platforms like X.
While platforms aim to manage engagement-driven content, responses to inquiries regarding rage-baiting have been minimal. Recently, Meta’s Adam Mosseri acknowledged the challenge in controlling a rise in engagement-bait practices on Threads, a move indicative of the platform struggles.
As the conversation turns to politics, Zesu expresses her hesitation about the use of rage bait in this arena. "I totally do not agree with that," she states firmly, advocating for responsible use of such content for education rather than misinformation, reflecting the complex ethical landscape shaping the current state of digital content creation.
Zesu's TikTok videos often portray the glamorous life of a model, where her supposed biggest issue is her attractiveness, stirring negative reactions among viewers who critique her demeanor and confidence. "I get a lot of nasty comments, people say ‘you're not the prettiest girl,'" she recounts, highlighting the engagement-driven nature of her content.
This new form of engagement is not to be confused with the traditional clickbait style of engagement, which typically aims to attract viewers through intrigue and is built on a foundation of trust. Marketing podcaster Andrea Jones points out that "rage-baiting content is designed to be manipulative." Human psychology, particularly our inherent bias toward negative stimuli, supports the effectiveness of this method. Dr. William Brady, who studies the interaction of technology with human behavior, asserts that our propensity to pay attention to negative content is deeply ingrained.
As social media platforms ramp up their financial support for creators, including incentivizing engagement through likes and shares, rage-baiting content has surged. Andréa Jones observes, "If we see someone doing something obscene, we may type in the comments ‘this is terrible,’ and that sort of comment is seen as a higher quality engagement by the algorithm.” This financial incentive often drives creators to prioritize shocking or contentious material to maximize views, sometimes at the cost of viewer well-being, which can lead to disconnection from the online environment.
Rage-baiting spans various formats, from contentious celebrity gossip to bizarre food concoctions, but its political implications have become particularly pronounced during this election year. Dr. Brady notes an observable spike in rage-baiting ahead of elections, particularly in the U.S., suggesting that outrage can serve to galvanize political action.
Recent inquiries into the practices on social media platforms have discovered users monetizing content rife with misinformation and sensationalism, often to alarming effects. Experts caution that exposure to excessive negative content can result in disengagement from news and political discourse. Ariel Hazel, an assistant professor at the University of Michigan, emphasizes that “it can be draining to have such high emotions all the time," leading people to turn away from the news altogether.
Concerns also extend to the normalization of outrage outside the digital realm, as algorithms amplify extreme content, rendering it seemingly more prevalent. The small fraction of users pushing politically extreme content can dominate the perception on platforms like X.
While platforms aim to manage engagement-driven content, responses to inquiries regarding rage-baiting have been minimal. Recently, Meta’s Adam Mosseri acknowledged the challenge in controlling a rise in engagement-bait practices on Threads, a move indicative of the platform struggles.
As the conversation turns to politics, Zesu expresses her hesitation about the use of rage bait in this arena. "I totally do not agree with that," she states firmly, advocating for responsible use of such content for education rather than misinformation, reflecting the complex ethical landscape shaping the current state of digital content creation.
