← Back to Library

The economics of why pop culture is so boring now

Joeri Schasfoort dismantles the popular narrative that creativity has died in 2025, revealing instead a fractured cultural landscape where the "top 20" has become a fortress of sequels while a vibrant, thriving "long tail" of original work flourishes unseen. By synthesizing economic theory with hard data on global box office trends and independent game revenue, Schasfoort offers a counterintuitive diagnosis: the internet didn't fail to democratize culture; it simply amplified the "superstar effect" to a global scale, forcing blockbusters to become safer while niche creators found new, lucrative lifelines.

The Illusion of Stagnation

Schasfoort opens by confronting the visceral frustration of modern media consumption, noting that "2025 was the year creativity seemingly died" when looking strictly at the charts. He points to a stark statistic: while only a quarter of top movies were sequels three decades ago, that figure now hovers near 90%. This framing is effective because it validates the reader's fatigue before pivoting to the economic machinery behind it. The author argues that this isn't a failure of imagination but a result of shifting market dynamics.

"In the early 2000s, Wired editor-in-chief Chris Anderson famously predicted that as the internet made it cheaper and cheaper to send songs, movies, and games to customers around the world, this would enable niche creators to rise while it would cause big studios to become less powerful."

Schasfoort explains that Anderson's "Long Tail" theory was logically sound regarding production costs but missed the behavioral shift in consumption. The digital revolution did indeed lower barriers to entry, causing an explosion in the volume of content. However, the author notes that "the number of new songs added each year rose from about 50,000 in 1988 to nearly 350,000 by 2007," yet the top of the charts remained dominated by established franchises. This distinction is crucial: the problem isn't a lack of supply, but a concentration of demand at the very top.

The economics of why pop culture is so boring now

Critics might argue that the "Long Tail" is a statistical mirage where the sheer volume of low-quality noise drowns out genuine innovation, but Schasfoort pushes back with evidence that quality has not suffered.

"While critics really, really love music from the 1970s, average appreciation for newer music remained stable after Napster revolutionized song distribution."

The author marshals data to show that independent films now account for 40% of box office revenue, and on platforms like Steam, indie games generate nearly half the revenue of big-budget titles. This suggests that the "death of creativity" is a perception bias caused by the overwhelming visibility of global blockbusters. The argument holds up well here; the market isn't broken, it's just bifurcated.

The Superstar Economy and Globalization

The core of Schasfoort's analysis lies in explaining why the top tier has become so risk-averse. He introduces the concept of "superstar markets," where globalization has turned cultural consumption into a winner-take-all game. As media companies target international audiences, particularly in Asia and Latin America, they prioritize content that transcends language and cultural nuance.

"Films that travel best across global markets tend to share certain characteristics: visual spectacle, familiar franchises, and instantly recognizable stars."

This is the piece's most compelling insight. Schasfoort argues that because the cost of producing top-tier content has skyrocketed due to the need for global appeal, investors demand "safe products." This creates a feedback loop where only sequels and remakes get the massive budgets required to compete globally. The author illustrates this with the shift in Hollywood revenue: "Today, most of the theatrical revenue from major films comes from outside the US and Canada."

"In this superstar environment, small differences in quality or recognition can have outside effects."

The economic logic is sound: when the potential audience is the entire planet, the penalty for failure is catastrophic, so studios double down on known quantities. However, this framing slightly overlooks the role of algorithmic curation on streaming platforms, which may artificially reinforce this concentration by pushing familiar titles to the top of recommendation engines, regardless of their global travelability.

Despite the dominance of blockbusters at the top, Schasfoort insists that the "Long Tail" is not just a graveyard of failed experiments but a golden age of niche success.

"Creativity has not disappeared. It has split in two with a vast vibrant longtail of experimentation coexisting alongside a small number of highly optimized blockbusters that dominate our shared cultural spotlight."

The author supports this by highlighting specific successes in independent gaming and film, noting that awards often go to smaller, self-published titles like Hades 2 or Silksong rather than the highest-grossing sequels. This reframes the narrative from one of loss to one of divergence. The reader is left with the realization that their boredom is a function of where they are looking, not what is being made.

"No, 2025 was not a bad year for pop culture in general, just for the top 20."

Bottom Line

Schasfoort's strongest contribution is the clear separation of "popularity" from "creativity," proving that the economic incentives for blockbusters have distorted our perception of the cultural landscape. The argument's vulnerability lies in its optimism about discovery; while the "Long Tail" exists, the mechanisms to help busy consumers find it remain fragmented and often require active, difficult searching. The piece ultimately serves as a necessary corrective to cultural pessimism, urging readers to look beyond the algorithmic spotlight to find the thriving, diverse creativity that has always existed just out of frame.

Sources

The economics of why pop culture is so boring now

by Joeri Schasfoort · Money & Macro · Watch video

Okay, it's official. 2025 was the year creativity seemingly died. The bestselling movies like Zootopia 2, Jurassic World, and Mission Impossible 8 were all sequels or they were remasters like Lilo and Stitch and How to Train Your Dragon. Similarly, the bestselling video games Battlefield 6, Borderlands 4, Madden 26 were all big franchises or remasters like Oblivion Remastered.

Meanwhile, names that we've seen for decades like Lady Gaga, Billy Isish, and Bruno Mars once again dominated the music charts. And no, 2025 was not an exceptional year in that regard. Take a look at this chart. 30 years ago, only about one quarter of top 20 movies were sequels, spin-off, prequels, or remakes.

Now it's close to 90%. Similarly, almost all of the top selling video games now come from established franchises. Even books show this very same trend. The share of top selling titles written by an already famous author is increasing each year.

But wasn't the internet supposed to do the opposite? >> >> In the early 2000s, Wired editorin chief Chris Anderson famously predicted that as the internet made it cheaper and cheaper to send songs, movies, and games to customers around the world, this would enable niche creators to rise while it would cause big studios to become less powerful. This theory, the theory of the longtail was a beautiful idea, the democratization of culture. So, what went wrong?

As always on Money Micro, for this video, we, a team of economists, went deep into the economics literature and summarized all the key insights that can explain why big budget sequels are bigger than ever today. And we ask the question if the rise of sequels reduced creativity or if there's actually a thriving long tale of amazing niche content that you just don't know about hiding below the surface. But to answer these questions, we first need to understand how the media industry used to work. The gatekeeper economics of the pre-in media.

Let's go back to the 1980s. Now, imagine you were a singer and wanted to earn a living with your passion. The odds would be stacked against you from the very beginning. First, you needed a studio filled with super expensive equipment to record your song.

Second, to distribute your song, you needed a factory to press records. Third, these records then needed to be distributed to thousands of record shops. ...