X replaces its revenue-sharing program with ‘Original Content Rewards’
X will replace its creator revenue-sharing scheme with Original Content Rewards on 8 September, aiming to pay creators for material it considers original rather than for content that exploits engagement incentives. The change matters because the previous programme had been repeatedly altered under Elon Musk and criticised for encouraging low-quality, click-driven posting.
Eligibility requires at least 500 verified followers and 500,000 Home Timeline impressions from verified users over the previous 90 days. Payments will be based on qualified impressions—unique views by Premium subscribers where at least half of a post is visible—and eligible work can include original reporting, analysis, user-made images or video, illustrations, memes, and meaningful commentary; existing participants will continue earning until 7 September.
- X launches Original Content Rewards on 8 September.
- Creators need 500 verified followers and 500,000 verified impressions.
- The scheme prioritises original content over engagement-driven reposting.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
Supporters can argue that replacing revenue sharing with Original Content Rewards is a sensible attempt to direct payments towards work that adds distinctive value to the platform, rather than simply rewarding broad engagement. Clear eligibility thresholds may help focus limited funds on creators with an established, verifiable audience and reduce incentives for spam, reposting and engagement bait. They may see this as a way to make X’s creator economy more sustainable and improve the quality of material users encounter.
The case against
Critics can argue that ending an already frequently revised revenue-sharing scheme creates uncertainty for creators who built plans and income expectations around it. Requiring 500 verified followers and 500,000 verified-user timeline impressions could exclude smaller, newer or niche voices, even where their work is genuinely original and valuable. They may also question whether a platform-controlled definition of ‘original content’ and opaque reward criteria will fairly recognise the diverse forms of contribution that keep X useful.