Connect with us

Published

on

In this article

Joseph Melles is a content creator who has made thousands from Snap’s Spotlight feature, but he is now planning to post his content elsewhere after payments from the company have started to dry up.
Courtesy of Joseph Melles

Joseph Melles had been working at Wendy’s for a few months when he began to post videos to Snapchat’s Spotlight feature in hopes of landing some of the $1 million per day prize money the company was offering for videos that went on the app. 

Melles started posting videos in March, and Snap, the company that makes Snapchat, sent him a message in April offering him thousands of dollars after one of his videos racked up 300,000 views in 24 hours. Melles got a $19,600 payment from Snap for the video, and he quit his Wendy’s job a few days later.

“I was just in shock,” said Melles, 18 of Colorado.

Snapchat set the bar last year when it announced it would pay out Spotlight creators from a pot of $1 million per day that the company promised it would continue to pay at least through 2020.

The social media giant minted a new class of millionaires, changing hundreds of lives. But that all began to change when the company announced on May 20 that it would no longer pay $1 million per day. Instead, Snap would pay “millions” per month starting June 1. A Snap spokeswoman told CNBC the new payout amount is in the “double-digit” millions each month, but declined to give a specific figure.

Now, complaining that payments are dwindling ever since that change, these creators are in search of other short-form video platforms where they can find similar hefty payments they had once gotten from Snap. 

Despite making a living off Snap for the better part of this year, Melles said he hasn’t posted a video to Spotlight since June. Although he was once posting as many as 100 videos per day, Melles said Snap’s erratic payments since June 1 have demotivated him from creating more content for Spotlight. 

“It’s sad because I worked really hard every day putting the hours in, but they haven’t paid me,” he said. 

Melles is among a migration of social media users who are taking their content-creating talents from Snapchat’s Spotlight feature and heading to other paying services. Social media companies are in a fierce battle over getting creators to prioritize individual apps. Companies like Snap, Facebook, Google, TikTok and Twitter are courting creators to try and get them to spend more time on each individual platform, so they can fill the app’s content feeds to draw more advertising revenue. 

“If they keep on skipping people like this, I feel like a lot of people will leave,” said Melles, who now spends his time creating YouTube videos. 

Despite these complaints, Snap’s spokespeople told CNBC that the company remains heavily invested in paying creators and is now reaching all-time highs for creators who submit content to Spotlight on a daily basis. The company, however, did not specify an exact figure for this all-time high.

“We have seen incredible creativity and growth on Spotlight this year, including a tripling of daily submissions quarter-over-quarter and all-time highs in the daily number of creators posting to Spotlight since June 1,” a Snap spokesperson said in a statement. “While this growth has made our incentive program more competitive, more creators are receiving Spotlight payouts than ever before, and we have recently rolled out a wide variety of new programs and tools to help creators continue to grow and monetize with Snapchat.” 

Snap also noted that restructuring its payout program allowed the company the flexibility to support creators who cater to niche communities as opposed to determining pay outs based solely on the absolute engagement that a single video gets.

Neda Anvar is a content creator who has made thousands from Snap’s Spotlight feature, but he is now planning to post his content elsewhere after payments from the company have started to dry up.
Courtesy of Neda Anvar

‘Going H.A.M.’ for $1 million a day

Snap launched Spotlight in November 2020 as its answer to TikTok and Facebook’s Instagram Reels. The company rolled out Spotlight along with a daily pool of more than $1 million as an incentive to motivate users to submit content to the new feature. 

That pile of cash drew in numerous teens and young adults with a surplus of free time during their virtual school and work days throughout the pandemic. These creators would upload numerous videos a day in hopes that one or two might go viral and warrant payment. 

Neda Anvar, 23 of California, was among them. She began making Spotlight videos in February after hearing from some friends that there was money to be made. The first time Anvar got paid, she received a modest $3,000 for one of her videos. But not long after, one of her friends was paid $100,000 by Snap for two of his videos that went viral. 

“After we got those initial first payments around February, then we started going H.A.M.,” Anvar said. (H.A.M. is a crude acronym popularized by Kanye West and Jay-Z, which roughly means to do something excessively.) “I work from home, so I kind of made it my second full-time job when I had little breaks in between my job.”

Anvar focused her content on just making short, catchy videos designed to grab audiences’ attention and lead them to watch multiple times, wracking up her videos’ view counts. The goal was for her videos to get at least 100,000 views in a 24-hour period. Prior to June 1, that was the rough threshold for knowing a video would get paid, she said. The method was to post multiple videos per day. 

“It was all about consistency and probability. One of them was bound to go viral on Spotlight,” said Anvar, whose system worked. By her count, Anvar has earned approximately $130,000 from Snap in 2021. 

For many of these creators, the money was life changing.  

Jhordyn Gaddy, 25 of Missouri, was “a completely broke kid” before he started posting Spotlight videos in November. Gaddy’s cellphone service had been turned off and his car was about to be repossessed, but after he read on Twitter about Snap’s $1 million per day Spotlight program, he posted 10 videos. One of those went viral, and Snap notified Gaddy he’d receive a payment for nearly $19,000.

“When they actually sent the money, my jaw hit the floor,” Gaddy said. 

Not long after, Gaddy took his Snap Spectacles, Snap’s computerized glasses with cameras designed for making Snapchat videos, and used them to record the view from the top of Pikes Peak in Missouri. He uploaded the video, and it racked up views over two days. Snap paid him twice for the video for a total of $93,000.

“This completely changed my life from where I was to where I am now,” said Gaddy, who used some of the money to turn his phone back on, pay off his car, buy his mom a Louis Vuitton purse and buy his little sister a car. 

“I made a few big purchases, but I still have a lot of money left,” Gaddy said. 

For Snap, the million dollar a day program was money well spent. It was able to quickly grow time spent on Spotlight and became one of its most used features. Snap said that in its second quarter, investing in Spotlight contributed approximately $76 million to its cost of revenue. 

Snap in April said Spotlight has reached 125 million monthly active users. In the company’s latest earnings call, Snap said Spotlight’s average daily content submissions more than tripled when compared to the prior quarter, it said. In the U.S. alone, daily time spent on Spotlight grew more than 60% since the first quarter, Snap added.

At the same time, the app grew to 293 million daily active users users overall this prior quarter. 

Jhordyn Gaddy is a content creator who has made thousands from Snap’s Spotlight feature, but he is now planning to post his content elsewhere after payments from the company have started to dry up.
Courtesy of Jhordyn Gaddy

‘No rhyme or reason’

Upset Snapchat creators can point to a date when they say things shifted with the company: June 1. 

Snap announced earlier this year it would change its incentive structure. Instead of a daily offering, users could earn from a pool of millions of dollars per month. When announcing the change in May, Snap said more than 5,400 creators had collectively earned over $130 million.

The company was still offering what was presented as hefty incentives, so many creators believed they’d still earn enough to justify their content creation. What they did not expect was how random the payments would become, many creators who spoke with CNBC said. 

Whereas before creators could reliably count on a payment if one of their videos went viral with more than hundreds of thousands of views within a day, now it is more of a raffle as to who gets paid. Several users chatting about their woes on the app Discord in a group called “Snapchat Spotlight” told CNBC they have had videos with millions of views in a 24-hour period since June 1 that did not receive any payment. Meanwhile, videos with fewer views might receive payments. 

Spotlight creators say there was a method to how Snap paid them prior to June 1, but now, there seems to be no rhyme or reason as to who gets paid. 

“I simply just want to know why I’m not getting paid for my videos,” said Caren Babaknia, who is one of the moderators of the Discord group. Babaknia, 24 of the state of Washington, said they have earned about $250,000 from Spotlight. 

Many of the creators in the Discord server said they feel Snap should pay them for their videos that have gone viral since June 1. Others say they simply want better communication from Snap so they can better understand how the company is determining who gets paid. The creators say there is no way to communicate directly with the company. There is a support email they can reach out to, but whenever they do, all they receive is an automated response. 

“Now it’s like ‘Oh I got 300,000 views. Maybe, if I’m really lucky, I’ll get paid,'” Anvar said. “Is it worth making content anymore because it seems like it’s a random raffle who gets paid and who doesn’t.”

Caren Babaknia is a content creator who has made thousands from Snap’s Spotlight feature, but he is now planning to post his content elsewhere after payments from the company have started to dry up.
Courtesy of Caren Babaknia

Creators jump ship to Instagram, YouTube and TikTok

The decrease in payments, the erratic nature of who gets paid and the lack of communication from Snap is why many of the Spotlight creators who spoke with CNBC said they’re considering leaving the platform or have already taken their content elsewhere. 

Melles’ YouTube account, for example, was recently monetized, which means he’ll soon be able to start earning money for the content he posts on YouTube’s video service. Anvar said she is planning to post videos to TikTok moving forward. TikTok doesn’t pay for content as much as Snap does, but there are brand deal opportunities to be had on that service, she said. Gaddy said he has pretty much stopped posting Spotlight videos and plans to instead post videos on YouTube and start a podcast where he talks about social media. And Babaknia said he is now also posting his content on TikTok and Instagram Reels.

“Once they stopped paying $1 million a day they stopped putting their care into it,” Babaknia said. 

Some creators indicated they’re planning on heading to YouTube Shorts or Instagram Reels. That’s because both of the companies recently have ramped up their efforts to draw in creators, each offering their own creator funds.

Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg said last month the company would pay out $1 billion now through 2022 to users who create content for its Facebook and Instagram social networks. The company also introduced a Reels Summer Bonus that would pay U.S. users who create great Reels content for Instagram. 

Google announced its YouTube Shorts Fund in May, which will pay out $100 million to creators over the course of 2021 to 2022. 

The Snap spokesperson told CNBC that there are other opportunities for creators to generate revenue through Snapchat besides Spotlight submissions. These avenues include Syndicated Shows on Snapchat’s Discover feature, an upcoming Gifting program, a Creator Marketplace and commerce opportunities. Snap also added that more features and creator programs will be announced soon.

Fortunately for Snap, however, its Spotlight feature is already populated with content. When Spotlight first launched, Snap relied on the $1 million per day pool to stimulate the creation of content. That prize money served to create a flywheel effect where now Spotlight has a steady stream of content and may no longer need a monetary boost. 

The creators who are leaving Spotlight say they’re grateful for the money they earned from Snap, but they think the company is making a mistake. Some of the creators said they’ve already noticed a decrease in the quality of the content found on Spotlight as a result of the drop in payments. 

“From what I see on Spotlight, there’s no good content. Everything I see on Spotlight I could see on TikTok or Reels or YouTube Shorts. It’s pretty much all the same content now,” Gaddy said. “It used to be like actually looking at somebody’s Snapchat story. Spotlight used to be way more interesting.”

Continue Reading

Technology

OpenAI in talks to sell around $6 billion in stock at roughly $500 billion valuation

Published

on

By

OpenAI in talks to sell around  billion in stock at roughly 0 billion valuation

Sam Altman, CEO of OpenAI attends the annual Allen and Co. Sun Valley Media and Technology Conference at the Sun Valley Resort in Sun Valley, Idaho, U.S., on July 8, 2025.

David A. Grogan | CNBC

OpenAI is preparing to sell around $6 billion in stock as part of a secondary sale that would value the company at roughly $500 billion, CNBC confirmed Friday.

The shares would be sold by current and former employees to investors including SoftBank, Dragoneer Investment Group and Thrive Capital, according to a person familiar with the negotiations who asked not to be named due to the confidential nature of the discussions. The talks are still in early stages and the details could change.

Bloomberg was first to report the discussions. All three firms are existing investors in OpenAI, but Thrive Capital could lead the round, as CNBC previously reported. SoftBank, Dragoneer and Thrive Capital did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

OpenAI’s valuation has grown exponentially since the artificial intelligence startup launched its generative AI chatbot ChatGPT in late 2022.

The company announced a $40 billion funding round in March at a $300 billion, by far the largest amount ever raised by a private tech company. Earlier this month, OpenAI announced its most recent $8.3 billion in fresh capital tied to that funding round.

Last week, OpenAI announced GPT-5, its latest and most advanced large-scale AI model. OpenAI said the model is smarter, faster and “a lot more useful,” particularly across domains like writing, coding and health care. But it’s been a rocky roll out, as some users complained about losing access to OpenAI’s prior models.

“We for sure underestimated how much some of the things that people like in GPT-4o matter to them, even if GPT-5 performs better in most ways,” OpenAI CEO Sam Altman wrote in a post on X.

WATCH: OpenAI staffer reportedly to sell $6 billion in stock to SoftBank and other investors

OpenAI staffer reportedly to sell $6 billion in stock to SoftBank and other investors

Continue Reading

Technology

Tech IPOs are roaring after ‘years of Prohibition’ — it may be too good

Published

on

By

Tech IPOs are roaring after 'years of Prohibition' — it may be too good

Brendan Blumer, Chairman of of Bullish and Tom Farley, CEO of Bullish, Bullish a cryptocurrency exchange operator, pose with staffs during the company’s IPO at the New York Stock Exchange in New York City, U.S., August 13, 2025.

NYSE

The Bullish IPO this week took on added significance, perhaps because of the company name.

When shares of the Peter Thiel-backed cryptocurrency exchange more than doubled out of the gate on Wednesday before finishing the day up 84%, it was the latest sign that the tech IPO bulls are back in business.

In July, design software vendor Figma more than tripled in its New York Stock Exchange debut, and a month earlier shares of crypto firm Circle soared 168% in their first day on the Big Board.

Wall Street has been waiting a long time for this.

Three years ago, steep inflation and soaring interest effectively closed the market for public offerings. Tech stocks tanked and private capital dried up, forcing cash-burning startups to turn their attention away from growth and toward efficiency and profitability.

The roadblock appeared to be loosening earlier this year, when companies like StubHub and Klarna filed their prospectuses, but then President Donald Trump roiled the markets in April with his plans for sweeping tariffs. Roadshows were put on indefinite hold.

The president’s tariff agenda has since stabilized a bit, and investor money is pouring into tech, pushing the Nasdaq to record levels, up more than 40% from this year’s low in April. Optimism is growing that the hefty backlog of high-valued startups will continue to clear as CEOs and venture capitalists gain confidence that the public markets will welcome their top-tier companies.

Ahead of Figma’s debut, NYSE president Lynn Martin told CNBC’s “Squawk on the Street” that immense demand for that offering could “open the floodgates” for the rest of the market. And earlier this week, Nasdaq CEO Adena Friedman told “Fast Money” that there’s a “very healthy list” of companies looking to IPO in the second half of this year, ahead of the holiday season.

“I’ve been meeting a lot of CEOs, getting them prepared to think about what they want in the public markets and where they’re going,” Friedman said.

There are more than two-dozen venture-backed U.S. tech companies valued at $10 billion or more, according to CB Insights. StubHub has updated its prospectus, suggesting an offering is coming soon.

“The IPO window is open,” said Rick Heitzmann, a partner at venture firm FirstMark, in an interview with CNBC’s “Closing Bell” this week. “You’ve seen across industry, broad-based support for IPOs, and therefore, we’re advising companies we’re investing in to get ready and go public.”

IPO window is open and we're advising companies to go public: FirstMark Capital's Rick Heitzmann

Another big topic among VCs and bankers is the regulatory environment.

The Biden administration took heat from startup investors for cracking down on big acquisitions, mostly attributable to Lina Khan’s perceived heavy hand at the Federal Trade Commission, while also failing to ease restrictions that they say make it less appealing for companies to go public than to stay private.

Paul Atkins, the new head of the SEC, said in July he wants to “make IPOs great again,” by removing some of the impediments around the complexity of disclosures and litigation risk. He hasn’t offered many specific recommendations.

Friedman told CNBC that the first conversation she had with Atkins after he took the job was about making it easier and more attractive for companies to go public.

“The conversation was constructive along many fronts, looking at disclosure requirements, the proxy process, other things that really make it harder for companies to be public and navigate the public markets,” Friedman said. “He’s as interested as we are, so hopefully we’ll turn that into great action.”

In addition to the big gains notched by Bullish, Figma and Circle, the public markets welcomed online banking provider Chime with a 37% gain last month and trading app eToro with a 29% pop in May. The health-tech market has seen two IPOs: Hinge Health and Omada Health.

But it was the roaring debuts of Circle and Figma that sparked chatter of a new bull market for IPOs. Figma jumped 250% on IPO day after pricing shares a dollar ahead of an updated range. Circle’s value more than doubled after the stablecoin issuer also priced above the expected range.

Figma celebrates its initial public offering at the New York Stock Exchange on July 31, 2025.

NYSE

That sort of price action reignited a debate ahead of the last IPO boom in 2020 and 2021, when venture capitalist Bill Gurley made the case that big first-day pops suggest intentionally mispriced offerings that hurt the company and hand easy money to new investors. Gurley has advocated for direct listings, where companies list shares at a price that effectively matches demand.

As Figma was hitting the market, Gurley was back at it, referring to the big gains as an “expected & fully intentional” outcome benefitting clients of major investment banks

“They bought it at $33 last night and can sell it today for over $90,” he wrote. In a follow-up post, he said, “I would have loved to see DLs replace IPOs — it just makes sense to match supply/demand. But Wall Street may just be too addicted to the massive customer give-aways.”

Read more CNBC tech news

Lise Buyer, founder of IPO advisory firm Class V Group, wrote on LinkedIn that the company gets to make the call on where it prices the stock and that plenty of thought gets put into the process. Also, in the IPO, companies are selling only a small percentage of outstanding shares — in Figma’s case roughly 7% — so if they deliver on results, “there will very likely be plenty of future opportunities to sell more shares at higher prices.”

That’s already happening.

Circle said this week that it’s offering another 10 million shares in a secondary offering. And on Friday’s, CNBC’s Leslie Picker reported that bankers for CoreWeave, which is up 150% since its March IPO, orchestrated some block trades this week.

But Buyer warns that tech markets have a history of overheating. While there’s always a difference between what institutions are willing to pay in an IPO and what exuberant retail investors will pay, it’s currently “a gap like we haven’t really seen since 1999, 2000,” Buyer told CNBC, adding “and, of course, we know how that ended.”

Compared to the dot-com bubble, businesses that are going public now have sizable revenue and actual fundamentals, but that doesn’t mean the IPO pops are sustainable, she said.

“It’s almost like we had several years of Prohibition,” Buyer said, referring to a period a century ago when alcohol was banned in the U.S. “Folks, in some cases, are drinking to excess in the IPO market.”

WATCH: Bankers lead block trades in CoreWeave

Sources say J.P. Morgan, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley managed several CoreWeave blocks

Continue Reading

Technology

Sen. Hawley to probe Meta AI bot policies for children following damning report

Published

on

By

Sen. Hawley to probe Meta AI bot policies for children following damning report

Meta Platforms CEO Mark Zuckerberg departs after attending a Federal Trade Commission trial that could force the company to unwind its acquisitions of messaging platform WhatsApp and image-sharing app Instagram, at U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., U.S., April 15, 2025.

Nathan Howard | Reuters

Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., said Friday that he will investigate Meta following a report that the company approved rules allowing artificial intelligence chatbots to have certain “romantic” and “sensual” conversations with children.

Hawley called on Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg to preserve relevant materials, including emails, and said the probe would target “whether Meta’s generative-AI products enable exploitation, deception, or other criminal harms to children, and whether Meta misled the public or regulators about its safeguards.”

“Is there anything – ANYTHING – Big Tech won’t do for a quick buck?” Hawley said in a post on X announcing the investigation.

Meta declined to comment on Hawley’s letter.

Hawley noted a Reuters report published Thursday that cited an internal document detailing acceptable behaviors from Meta AI chatbots that the company’s staff and contract workers should permit as part of developing and training the software.

The document acquired by Reuters noted that a chatbot would be permitted to hold a romantic conversation with an eight-year-old, telling the child that “every inch of you is a masterpiece – a treasure I cherish deeply.”

The Meta guidelines said: “It is acceptable to describe a child in terms that evidence their attractiveness (ex: ‘your youthful form is a work of art’),” according to the Reuters report.

Read more CNBC tech news

The Meta chatbots would not be permitted to engage in more explicit conversations with children under 13 “in terms that indicate they are sexually desirable,” the report said.

“We intend to learn who approved these policies, how long they were in effect, and what Meta has done to stop this conduct going forward,” Hawley wrote.

A Meta spokesperson told Reuters that “The examples and notes in question were and are erroneous and inconsistent with our policies, and have been removed.”

“We have clear policies on what kind of responses AI characters can offer, and those policies prohibit content that sexualizes children and sexualized role play between adults and minors,” the Meta spokesperson told Reuters.

Hawley said Meta must produce documents about its Generative AI-related content risks and standards, lists of every product that adheres to those policies, and other safety and incident reports.

Meta should also provide various public and regulatory communications involving minor safety and documents about staff members involved with the AI policies to determine “the decision trail for removing or revising any portions of the standard.”

Hawley is chair of the Senate Committee Subcommittee on Crime and Counterterrorism, which will carry out the investigation.

Meta has until Sep. 19 to provide the documents, the letter said.

WATCH: Robby Starbuck on Meta lawsuit.

Robby Starbuck on Meta lawsuit: We don't want AI putting its thumb on the scale in politics

Continue Reading

Trending