South Africa's Digital Creators Operate Without Safety Nets, Study Warns

South Africa’s digital content creators shape what millions of people read, watch and believe, yet they do so without formal training, legal guidance or safety infrastructure. A new UNESCO-backed study finds that audiences depend on these creators’ judgment every day, with none of the assurances that traditional journalism’s professional standards are meant to provide.

The research, conducted by the Centre for Analytics and Behavioural Change as part of UNESCO’s global Behind the Screens project, surveyed 48 creators across South Africa and interviewed 11 working across multiple platforms and genres. The findings reveal a troubling mismatch: creators increasingly determine what millions of South Africans see and believe, yet lack the foundational training, professional networks and support systems that could help them operate ethically and safely.

Jesse Cann, research director at the Centre for Analytics and Behavioural Change, framed the core problem plainly: “What struck us most wasn’t that creators lack good intentions. They want to be trusted, they want to do right by their audiences. But we’re asking people to shoulder the same responsibilities as journalists without any of the training, legal grounding or support structures journalists have built up over decades. That gap is where the real risk sits. Not with the creators, but with the ecosystem around them.”

The appetite for guidance is unmistakable. Nearly 88% of respondents said ethical guidelines for content creation would be valuable, and 87% wanted training on ethics and freedom of expression. Yet only 10.4% had received media and information literacy training, half had no journalism background, and fewer than one in five belonged to a professional association relevant to digital creators. The South African Content Creators Union was only established in late 2025, leaving a long-standing void in institutional support.

One of the study’s most striking findings concerns the gap between creators’ self-assessment and their actual practices. Many respondents rated their own media and information literacy competencies highly, and more than half believed they actively encourage critical thinking among followers. Everyday behaviour tells a different story. Some 36% do not consistently verify information before sharing it, while 34% use likes and views as a signal that content is credible. Only 30% prioritise supporting evidence and documentation when judging credibility. In an online environment increasingly vulnerable to misinformation, this disconnect between confidence and practice poses a real risk to public understanding.

Artificial intelligence has become routine for many creators, used primarily for writing captions, generating ideas, editing content and conducting research. Nearly a quarter use AI regularly, while another third use it occasionally. Transparency lags far behind adoption. Only 33% consistently tell audiences when AI has been used in creating content. Interviews revealed that creators worry admitting AI use could damage perceptions of authenticity and weaken audience trust, even though many of those same creators acknowledged that audiences still want authentic personalities rather than AI-generated content.

Meanwhile, platform algorithms exert enormous influence over what creators produce. Interviewees described recommendation algorithms, trending sounds, hashtags and engagement metrics as powerful editorial forces shaping decisions about what to post and how often. Some admitted producing content designed for algorithmic performance rather than personal values because visibility depends on platform success. Creators also expressed frustration with opaque moderation systems, saying content is sometimes removed, demonetised or restricted without clear explanation.

The study documents widespread online abuse. Three-quarters of respondents said they had experienced or witnessed technology-facilitated gender-based violence, including cyber harassment, impersonation, reputational attacks and image-based abuse. Four in ten never reported these incidents because they lacked confidence that reporting mechanisms would help. Hate speech is also common: 43% said they had personally experienced identity-based harassment, while 72% had experienced or witnessed xenophobia online. More than a third reported real-world violence connected to online attacks, illustrating how digital abuse increasingly spills into offline life.

The report calls for creator-focused media literacy programmes, practical AI ethics guidance, peer learning networks, stronger support for online safety and wellbeing, and clearer education on the legal rights and responsibilities governing digital content creation. As creators become increasingly influential intermediaries between information and the public, the question that remains is whether South Africa’s institutions will move quickly enough to build that support before the gaps widen further.