THE CREATOR-BRAND-PUBLICIST PROBLEM

SPAM. four disciplines that have become a famous social tag that should, in theory, live in harmony. However, there is a disconnect between brands, creators, and those who represent them. 

When it comes to brand-creator relationships, mishaps have become predictable. It's a cliche at this point: big, out of touch brands don't understand what a creator is or can be. Creators destroy their audience goodwill for a check. Publicists on both sides push for the narrative that fits their agenda best.

I chatted with Substacker, consultant, and PR pro Sarah Karger from Affiliate for Publicists about this gap. If anyone knows how to get the SPAM nations in harmony, it's her.

You have written about the gap between what brands expect from creators and what creators actually need (especially around affiliate). Where does that gap come from, is it the creator juggling too many roles, or brands misunderstanding who they're pitching to?

[The gap forms] mostly from brands misunderstanding the business creators are actually running. Brands often approach creators as if content is the end product, when the creator is balancing audience trust, production costs, platform performance, affiliate revenue, and their own long-term positioning. However, many brands want sales above all else. So the ask to create content, from the outset, isn't aligned with their business needs. 

Affiliate is a great example. A brand may see commission as sufficient compensation, but the creator sees the time, product risk, content cost, and opportunity cost involved. The creator juggling multiple roles can complicate things, but the bigger problem is usually that the pitch was built around what the brand wants rather than what would make sense for the creator’s business. 

That said, creators are part of the problem when they set unrealistic expectations for paid placements where the ROI just isn't there for the brand. Many brands are going through a reconciliation of their creator programs due to this gap. Just this week I had a creator reach out asking for another high ticket product sample after their first collab drove traffic, but no sales. There's a happy medium. Creators need to be invested in the financial success of the brand they are working with. Both sides need to level set expectations if the channel will be viewed as successful beyond content creation. 

For brands, this gap explains why viral moments stopped delivering. Audiences know they're being sold to constantly and need the relationship first, the sale second. Aligning with the idea that two-way PR is a necessity as opposed to the gold standard, it starts with brands understanding what business to pitch to.

When someone is building an audience on Substack but also chasing TikTok virality and managing affiliate income, how does that split attention change what they care about? 

They become much more selective about what earns their time.

A Substack audience may reward depth and consistency. TikTok rewards speed, relevance, and entertainment. Affiliate rewards conversion. Brand partnerships may reward reach or deliverables. The creator is constantly deciding whether an opportunity serves one of those goals, several of them, or none of them particularly well.

That means a pitch cannot just be “a good fit for your audience.” It needs to be clear why this is worth prioritizing over everything else competing for their attention.

A Substack full of thoughtful analysis doesn't convert like a viral TikTok. Virality and vanity placements aren't valuable just because everyone chases them. One platform might be perfect for the intended audience while the other is just noise, even if the reach looks bigger.

For publicists or brands reading this, what should they actually understand about pitching someone who's part-creator, part-journalist, part-business owner? 

First, figure out which hat you are pitching. Are you offering them a story worth covering, a product worth recommending, or a partnership worth investment over the long haul? Those are three different asks, even when they are going to the same person.

Do not assume editorial interest automatically includes social content, affiliate links, or guaranteed coverage. At the same time, we can't treat their business model as something that compromises their judgment or dictate what WE want for THEIR audience. Many of these people have built strong businesses precisely because their audience trusts their judgment, so let them do what they do best. 

The best pitches respect both sides. Be real, be transparent about the commercial opportunity, and let them decide how or whether the two fit together.

This landed with me because this is a common PR mistake that encroaches on trope territory. We pitch a partnership and get mad when a creator is loyal to what serves their audience and their business, and those have to align. 

Which brings us back to something Sarah mentioned earlier, trust is the actual asset. Trust doesn't come from commission rates or product samples or flight upgrades. It comes from credibility.

You've said credibility > commission rates. But when someone's trying to monetize their audience across multiple platforms and channels, how does credibility stand?

Credibility is what makes the monetization work. Full stop. 

A higher commission rate may get someone’s attention, but it cannot make an irrelevant or mediocre product convert over time. Audiences are very good at noticing when recommendations start feeling transactional.

Creators who protect their credibility may turn down more opportunities in the short term, but they build an audience that listens when they do recommend something. That trust is ultimately more valuable than any individual commission rate or campaign fee.

Metrics are great, but they don’t measure that audiences know when they're being sold to. They can allude to when a creator stopped protecting their credibility or when a brand stopped respecting the relationship. Good strategy, one that sees audience/creator/brand relationships more holistically can account for this, though. 

So maybe a step in getting the SPAM nations in harmony is to have all sides say “no” more often to the wrong opportunities, evaluating beyond what is tangible and showing mutual respect for the hustle.