X replaces ‘misaligned’ revenue sharing program with Original Content Rewards
X will replace its Revenue Sharing scheme with Original Content Rewards, aiming to pay creators for work it considers genuinely original rather than content designed to maximise payouts. The change matters because it is X’s latest effort to curb earnings by aggregators and repost-focused accounts, following criticism that the existing incentives had become misaligned.
New entrants to Revenue Sharing will no longer be accepted, and current participants can earn under the old system until 7 September before applying for the new programme from 8 September. Eligibility will still require an X Premium subscription, at least 500 verified followers and 500,000 verified-user Home Timeline impressions over 90 days; qualifying work may include original reporting, analysis, media, memes and commentary, while copied or insufficiently transformed posts will not qualify.
- X is replacing Revenue Sharing with Original Content Rewards.
- The new scheme prioritises original, meaningfully transformed work.
- Current eligibility thresholds and Premium subscription requirements remain.
Both sides, in good faith
The strongest fair case each way — we don't pick a winner.
The case for
The old Revenue Sharing system created perverse incentives that undermined platform quality by rewarding accounts that aggregated and reposted others' content with minimal transformation, effectively enabling content theft at scale. By pivoting to Original Content Rewards, X can align financial incentives with genuine value creation—original reporting, analysis, commentary and media that benefit both creators and the broader user base. This focuses resources on work that improves discourse whilst protecting original creators from seeing their efforts harvested by low-effort aggregators, creating a more sustainable ecosystem.
The case against
The shift to Original Content Rewards raises barriers to entry for emerging creators and those without existing audiences or verification status, potentially consolidating rewards amongst established voices. The criteria for 'originality' and acceptable 'transformation' are inherently subjective and prone to inconsistent application, creating uncertainty about what qualifies, whilst rapid transition leaves current creators little time to adapt. The requirements for Premium subscriptions and significant metrics favour well-resourced creators over diverse voices, and the system may undervalue important curatorial and aggregation functions that help users discover relevant content.