Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 1

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Behind the “AI slop”: exploring the AI-generated viral short video production in China

Tang, Jiaru, Yu, Xiaoting, Wikström, Patrik, Pappalardo, Kylie·2026·AI & SOCIETY
DOI 10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

As generative AI becomes embedded in platform-based cultural production, new forms of creative labour are emerging that challenge established understandings of what it means to be a “creator.” This article examines AI slop creators in China, a group that uses generative tools to benchmark viral content, test formats, operate matrix account systems, and formalise production, transforming virality from an unpredictable outcome into an object of systematic management. Drawing on ethnographic research conducted between 2023 and 2025 in China, this study shows AI enables a cohort of “Internet entrepreneurs” to enter cultural production, driven by a “money hustling culture” that encourages formerly idle and low-skilled individuals to pursue rapid monetisation. The findings suggest that AI slop creators organise production less around authorship, identity and aspiration, and more around operational mastery, strategic disposability, and algorithmic opportunism. Rather than cultivating personal brands, they prioritise speed, scale and adaptability, pointing toward a post-creator mode of cultural labour in contemporary platform economies.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9

Cites

9 of 9 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 9 references

Research works printed but not linked: 42

  1. Abidin C (2016) Visibility labour: engaging with influencers’ fashion brands and #OOTD advertorial campaigns on Instagram. Media Int Aust Inc Cult Policy 161(1):86–100. https://doi.org/10.1177/1329878X16665177 · DOI · Paper page
  2. Are C, Briggs P, Brown R (2025) Content creators’ hopes and fears about artificial intelligence. Convergence 31(6):1901–1925 · DOI
  3. Arriagada A, Bishop S (2021) Between commerciality and authenticity: the imaginary of social media influencers in the platform economy. Commun Cult Crit 14(4):568–586. https://doi.org/10.1093/ccc/tcab050 · DOI
  4. Arrieta A (2025) The limits of virality: music creators and platform negotiation in the era of short-form video. Soc Media + Soc 11(4):1-13. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051251388000. (Original work published 2025) · DOI
  5. Bishop S (2020) Algorithmic experts: selling algorithmic lore on YouTube. Soc Media + soc 6(1): 1-11
  6. Bucher T (2018) Cleavage-control: stories of algorithmic culture and power in the case of the YouTube “Reply Girls”. In Z. Papacharissi (Ed.), A Networked Self and Platforms, Stories, Connections (pp. 125-143). Routledge · DOI
  7. Burgess J (2021) Platform studies. In Cunningham, Stuart & Craig, David (Eds.) Creator Culture: An Introduction to Global Social Media Entertainment. NYU Press, New York, NY, pp. 21-38 · DOI
  8. Chen JY, Sun P (2020) Temporal arbitrage, fragmented rush, and opportunistic behaviors: the labor politics of time in the platform economy. New Media Soc 22(9):1561–1579 · DOI
  9. Craig D, Lin J, Cunningham S (2021) Wanghong as social media entertainment in China. Palgrave Macmillan, New York · DOI · Paper page
  10. Crawford K (2016) Can an algorithm be agonistic? Ten scenes from life in calculated publics. Sci Technol Hum Values 1:77–92 · DOI · Paper page
  11. Cunningham S, Craig D, Lv J (2019) China’s livestreaming industry: platforms, politics, and precarity. Int J Cult Stud 22(6):719–736 · DOI
  12. Duester E (2024) Digital art work and AI: a new paradigm for work in the contemporary art sector in China. Eur J Cult Manag Policy 14:12470. https://doi.org/10.3389/ejcmp.2024.12470 · DOI
  13. Duffy BE (2016) The romance of work: gender and aspirational labour in the digital culture industries. Int J Cult Stud 19(4):441–457. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367877915572186 · DOI · Paper page
  14. Duffy BE (2020) Algorithmic precarity in cultural work. Commun Public 5(3–4):103–107. https://doi.org/10.1177/2057047320959855 · DOI
  15. Duffy BE, Pinch A, Sannon S, Sawey M (2021) The nested precarities of creative labor on social media. Soc Media + Soc 7(2):1-12. https://doi.org/10.1177/20563051211021368 · DOI
  16. Fung A, He W, Cao S (2023) Cultural capitals and creative labour of short video platforms: a study of wanghong on Douyin. Cult Trends 32(3):264–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/09548963.2022.2082862 · DOI · Paper page
  17. Glaser B, Strauss A (1967) Grounded theory: the discovery of grounded theory. Sociology 12(1):27–49
  18. Hallinan B, Striphas T (2016) Recommended for you: the Netflix prize and the production of algorithmic culture. New Media Soc 18(1):117–137 · DOI
  19. Kaye DBV, Chen X, Zeng J (2021) The co-evolution of two Chinese mobile short video apps: parallel platformization of Douyin and TikTok. Mob Media Commun 9(2):229–253 · DOI · Paper page
  20. Leaver T, Highfield T, Abidin C (2020) Instagram: visual social media cultures. Wiley
  21. Lee H-K (2024) Reflecting on cultural labour in the time of AI. Media Cult Soc 46(6):1312–1323 · DOI
  22. Li, M., Tan, C. K. K., & Yang, Y. (2020). Shehui Ren: cultural production and rural youths’ use of the Kuaishou video-sharing app in Eastern China. Information, Communication & Society, 23(10), 1499–1514. https://doi.org/10.1080/1369118X.2019.1585469 · DOI
  23. Liang M (2022) The end of social media? How data attraction model in the algorithmic media reshapes the attention economy. Media Cult Soc 44(6):1110–1131. https://doi.org/10.1177/01634437221077168. (Original work published 2022) · DOI
  24. Liang F, Ji L (2024) Manufacturing influencers: the gatekeeping roles of MCNs (multi-channel networks) in cultural production. Inf Commun Soc 27(12):2297–2313 · DOI
  25. Lin J (2023) Chinese creator economies: labor and bilateral creative workers. NYU Press. http://www.jstor.org/stable/jj.13944192 · DOI
  26. Lin, J., & Craig, D. (2026). Dialogue on creator and wanghong studies: Conceptual challenges and global approach. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 29(2), 344-353 · DOI
  27. Lin J, de Kloet J (2019) Platformization of the unlikely creative class: Kuaishou and Chinese digital cultural production. Soc Media + soc 5(4):1–12
  28. Lobato R, Thomas J (2015) The informal media economy. Wiley
  29. Lu IF, Wang L (2022) Relational platform entrepreneurs: live commerce and the 818 Jiazu. Glob Media China 7(3):283–302 · DOI
  30. Madsen D, Puyt R (2025) When AI turns culture into slop. AI Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-025-02630-1 · DOI
  31. Mejias UA, Couldry N (2019) Datafication. Internet Policy Rev 8(4) · DOI · Paper page
  32. Nieborg DB, Poell T (2018) The platformization of cultural production: theorizing the contingent cultural commodity. New Media Soc 20(11):4275–4292 · DOI · Paper page
  33. Sun Q (2026) Pawns in the power struggle: navigating creative labor precarity across MCNs, platforms, and state regulation in China. Int J Cult Stud 29(3):509–526 · DOI
  34. Sun P, Chen JY (2021) Platform labour and contingent agency in China. China Perspect 2021(1):19–27 · DOI
  35. Tang J, Liu X (2025) ‘NO TO AI GENERATED IMAGES’: fan art creators contesting AI integration on social media platforms. Media Int Aust 197(1):137–151 · DOI
  36. Tang J, Wikström P (2024) Side job, self-employed, high-paid: behind the AI slop flooding TikTok and Facebook. Conversation · DOI
  37. Ting, T.-Y. (2026). Unequal pathways to digital self-entrepreneurship: Class-inflected orientations regarding vlogging as a career. New Media & Society, 28(2), 793-810 · DOI
  38. Wan F, Yang T, Shi X, Rong K, Ansari S (2026) Scaling high and wide: how firms leverage AI and organizational design to overcome the scale-scope trade-off. Strateg Manag J. https://doi.org/10.1002/smj.70090 · DOI
  39. Xiao X, Tan B, Leong C, Tan FTC (2021) Powered by “Qinghuai”: the melding of traditional values and digital entrepreneurship in contemporary China. Inf Syst J 31(6):769–802. https://doi.org/10.1111/isj.12301 · DOI
  40. Yu X (2025) Satellite intermediaries: media management and entrepreneurial labour in the Chinese Wanghong livestream guilds. Glob Media China 10(3):372–390 · DOI
  41. Zhang G, Hjorth L (2019) Live-streaming, games and politics of gender performance: the case of Nüzhubo in China. Convergence 25(5–6):807–825 · DOI
  42. Zheng S (Sharon), Ewen N (2025) Chinese celebrity and Wanghong economy: diversification, motivation and capitalisation. Celebr Stud 16(2):280–283. https://doi.org/10.1080/19392397.2025.2484101 · DOI

Metadata

Authors
Tang, J., Yu, X., Wikström, P., & Pappalardo, K.
Venue
AI & SOCIETY
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Published
2026-08-12
Volume
41
Issue
10
Pages
9795-9807
ISSN
  • 0951-5666
  • 1435-5655
DOI
10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9
Cited by
1
References
9
Language
en
Licence
Funders
Queensland University of Technology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Behind the “AI slop”: exploring the AI-generated viral short video production in China. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9
The paper
Tang, J., Yu, X., Wikström, P., & Pappalardo, K. (2026). Behind the “AI slop”: exploring the AI-generated viral short video production in China. AI & SOCIETY. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00146-026-03254-9

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.