Digital self-entrepreneurship has become one of the most popular career options among younger generations. However, limited attention has been paid to the relationships between socioeconomic differences and digital self-entrepreneurship among youths. Using an extended Bourdieusian framework, this article critically reassesses vloggers’ digital creative labour, conditions and decisions by conceptualising them as various outcomes of position-taking in the emerging field of digital cultural production, tied to socioeconomic differences. Based on interviews with YouTubers in Hong Kong, this study examines how class background shapes young vloggers’ career paths and future aspirations. The findings reveal their divergent class-inflected orientations towards the common tensions between (1) platform productivity and creative autonomy, (2) elite evaluation and mass rating and (3) career planning and an uncertain vlogging future. Shifting the focus to the nexus between class inequality and the platform creative economy, this article provides a nuanced account of digital creative work amid platform precarity and uncertainty.
AlacovskaA (2019) ‘Keep hoping, keep going’: towards a hopeful sociology of creative work. The Sociological Review67(5): 1118–1136.
2.
ArriagadaABishopS (2021) Between commerciality and authenticity: the imaginary of social media influencers in the platform economy. Communication, Culture and Critique14(4): 568–586.
3.
BanksM (2017) Creative Justice: Cultural Industries, Work and Inequality. London: Rowman & Littlefield International.
4.
BanksM (2019) Precarity, biography, and event: work and time in the cultural industries. Sociological Research Online24(4): 541–556.
5.
BourdieuP (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
6.
BourdieuP (1993) The Field of Cultural Production. New York: Columbia University Press.
7.
BourdieuP (1996) The Rules of Art: Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
8.
BourdieuP (1998) Practical Reason: On the Theory of Action. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
9.
ChanAH (2002) Middle class formation and consumption in Hong Kong. In: ChauB-H (ed.) Consumption in Asia. Abingdon: Taylor and Francis, pp. 98–134.
10.
ChenW-FTingT-Y (2019) Contesting shopping tourism: neoliberal consumptionscapes and conflicts in host societies. Tourism Culture & Communication19(2): 155–160.
11.
CheungBLuiTWongT (1988) Class Analysis and Hong Kong. Hong Kong: Twilight Books.
12.
CunninghamSCraigD (2019) Social Media Entertainment: The New Intersection of Hollywood and Silicon Valley. New York: New York University Press.
13.
DuffyBE (2016) The romance of work: gender and aspirational labour in the digital culture industries. International Journal of Cultural Studies19(4): 441–457.
14.
DuffyBEPruchniewskaU (2017) Gender and self-enterprise in the social media age: a digital double bind. Information, Communication & Society20(6): 843–859.
15.
ForrestRXianS (2018) Accommodating discontent: youth, conflict and the housing question in Hong Kong. Housing Studies33(1): 1–17.
HesmondhalghDBakerS (2011) Creative Labour: Media Work in Three Cultural Industries. London: Routledge.
20.
KvaleSBrinkmannS (2008) Interviews: Learning the Craft of Qualitative Research Interviewing. London: SAGE.
21.
LevinaNArriagaM (2014) Distinction and status production on UGC platforms: using Bourdieu’s theory of cultural production to understand social dynamics in online fields. Information Systems Research25(3): 468–488.
22.
McRobbieA (2016) Be Creative: Making a Living in the New Culture Industries. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
23.
MearsA (2023) Bringing Bourdieu to a content farm: social media production fields and the cultural economy of attention. Social Media + Society9(3): 1–12.
24.
NeffG (2012) Venture Labor: Work and the Burden of Risk in Innovative Industries. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
25.
PitcanMMarwickAEboydd (2018) Performing a vanilla self: respectability politics, social class, and the digital world. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication23(3): 163–179.
26.
PunNChenPJinS (2024) Reconceptualising youth poverty through the lens of precarious employment during the pandemic: the case of creative industry. Social Policy and Society23(1): 87–102.
27.
RobinsonL (2009) A taste for the necessary: a Bourdieuian approach to digital inequality. Information Communication & Society12(4): 488–507.
28.
SchradieJ (2012) The trend of class, race, and ethnicity in social media inequality: who still cannot afford to blog?Information, Communication & Society15(4): 555–571.
29.
TingT-Y (2017) Struggling for tomorrow: the future orientations of youth activism in a democratic crisis. Contemporary Social Science12(3–4): 242–257.
30.
TingT-Y (2020) From ‘be water’ to ‘be fire’: nascent smart mob and networked protests in Hong Kong. Social Movement Studies19(3): 362–368.
31.
TingT-Y (2022) Opposing otherness in motion: mobile activism as transient heterotopia of resistance in Hong Kong’s networked mall protests. Geoforum136: 21–31.
32.
van DrielLDumitricaD (2021) Selling brands while staying ‘authentic’: the professionalization of Instagram influencers. Convergence27(1): 66–84.
33.
VickeryJR (2015) ‘I don’t have anything to hide, but . . .’: the challenges and negotiations of social and mobile media privacy for non-dominant youth. Information, Communication & Society18(3): 281–294.
34.
WeberM (1968) Class, status, party. In: EisenstadtSN (ed.) Max Weber on Charisma and Institution Building. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press, pp. 11–17.
35.
WongTWPLuiTL (2000) Morality, class, the Hong Kong way of life. In: LauS (ed.) Social Development and Political Change in Hong Kong. Sha Tin, Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, pp. 11–17.
36.
WongYLYChowYF (2020) No longer aspirational: a case study of young creative workers in Hong Kong who quit. Global Media and China5(4): 438–451.
