Content Monetization Dynamics Among TikTok Influencers in Nigeria: Strategies, Challenges, and Adaptive Market Practices

Abstract

Over the last few years, TikTok has become one of the most notable social networking apps, allowing users to upload videos with the possibility of gaining popularity. This has given rise to the emergence of influencers native to the platform. While Global North–focused TikTok studies have empirically examined the media economics of this platform in various capacities, emerging markets have experienced a research dearth in this regard. To understand the strategies they employ to monetize, as well as the challenges they face in generating revenue, this study interviewed 23 Nigerian TikTok influencers between the ages of 19 and 26. We find that Nigerian TikTok influencers rely on a mixture of brand partnerships, sponsored promotions, referral systems, cross-platform visibility, collaborative growth strategies, and account-region bypass to generate income within a platform environment that offers limited direct monetization opportunities to creators. The findings further show that influencer labour in the Nigerian context is shaped by unstable payment systems, algorithmic dependence, brand distrust, and the constant pressure to remain visible and relevant. Beyond economic concerns, the study reveals that creators experience emotional strain arising from online harassment, body shaming, and the psychological demands of continuous self-presentation.

1. Introduction

Little more than a half-decade ago, TikTok burst onto the social media scene and has quickly become a global youth sensation. As O’Brien et al. (2025) note, TikTok has generated a lot of scholarly and media attention in recent years and is, in fact, one of the fastest-growing social networking apps globally. Its short-form video appeal is largely youth-driven. Waliaula et al. (2025) corroborate this in their observation that TikTok’s rise was somewhat meteoric because by 2023, it had already surpassed many platforms in popularity among under-30 audiences (Waliaula et al., 2025).

Remarkably, TikTok’s viral rhythm has not been confined to affluent nations only. As Waliaula et al. (2025) emphasize, TikTok’s influence extends significantly into the African continent, with notable usage in countries such as Nigeria, South Africa and Kenya. However, the academic literature has been largely one-sided. O’Brien et al. (2025) report that although research on TikTok exploded between 2020 and 2024, the majority of authors were United States-based, which may have implications for research generalizability.

Equally of concern is TikTok’s monetization system. In theory, the platform is seen as playing a central role in the creator economy. Bleier et al. (2024) describe TikTok and other platforms alike as key actors supporting content creation, management, and monetization in the increasingly self-driven media market. However, in practice TikTok’s direct payout programs (e.g., the Creator Fund, TikTok Shop commissions, live-stream gifts) are geographically constrained because the platform pays most easily to creators in Europe, North America, or select Asian markets, while many emerging economies remain outside its in-app monetization loop.

Although studies on TikTok in the Global North have provided ample empirical examinations of the platform’s media economics in several respects (Suárez-Álvarez & Pastor-Rodríguez, 2023), there remains a clear shortage of scholarly attention to emerging markets. Peres et al. (2024) argue that despite the rapid expansion of the creator economy, there is still a need for research that explains how creators, platforms, firms, and consumers interact in the creator economy, particularly across diverse market settings. Likewise, Bleier et al. (2024) observe that although social media platforms have become central infrastructures of the creator economy, considerable opportunities remain to understand how platform design and governance shape creators’ commercial activities across different contexts. Turning specifically to TikTok, Sujon and Ntalla (2026) contend that the platform has transformed creator labour and digital economies by creating new tensions between commodification and creativity, visibility and voice, and authenticity and commercialisation (p. 148). Yet, much of this scholarship continues to be informed by contexts where platform monetization systems are already established. Addressing this imbalance, Simon and Nieborg (2025) examine platform labour in Nigeria and describe it as an “understudied” context shaped by distinctive economic, infrastructural, and cultural conditions that differ from those assumed in much existing platform research. They argue that Nigeria offers an important opportunity to decentre the Global North as the point of reference (p. 2). This study responds directly to these calls by turning to Nigeria, a country often dubbed as Africa’s leading digital content economy, to examine:

• The monetization strategies Nigerian TikTokers employ;
• The platform challenges and market constraints they encounter;
• The ethical dilemmas embedded in influencer monetization practices.

In so doing, we aim to contribute a Southern perspective to the growing scholarship on platform economies, influencer labour, and the emerging business models of social media content creation. The remainder of the work is structured as follows: firstly, the study reviews relevant literature on TikTok as a social media platform, precarity and digital labour in influencer work, and existing empirical research on the influencer economy; secondly, it outlines the methodology adopted for the study; thirdly, it presents and analyses the interview findings; and finally, it discusses the study’s limitations and directions for future research.

2. Literature Review

2.1. Overview of TikTok as a Social Media Platform

TikTok emerged almost overnight as the short video app that has reshaped social media. It is essentially the international version of Douyin, ByteDance’s Chinese app launched in 2016, while TikTok itself debuted in 2017 (Schellewald, 2023). TikTok is an app that allows people to create, share, and consume short video content, and is now one of the major landmarks of the global social media space. Despite its relative youth, TikTok’s growth has been phenomenal. By 2021, it had more than one billion active users worldwide, and by 2024 it had become one of the largest social media networks in the world, having amassed over one billion users faster than any app ever before (Schellewald, 2023; Ungless et al., 2025).

One reason TikTok attracts such attention is that it fits the age of mobile, fast, and visually compressed communication with remarkable ease. Unlike platforms that depend heavily on preexisting social ties, TikTok is organized around an endless recommendation stream that can place strangers, celebrities, hobbyists, activists, and comedians side by side in the same feed. During the COVID-19 lockdowns, its fun and joyful content was widely credited with helping to accelerate its popularity, Schellewald (2023) reports.

Who uses TikTok? The answer is, in large part, younger people, though the platform is widening its reach. Montag et al. (2021) report that over 80 percent of Chinese TikTok users are under 35 years old and that most U.S. users are under 30. Even so, the appeal of TikTok is broadening into older age groups and across diverse countries (Montag et al., 2021); however, that youthfulness continues to define the tone of the platform and much of its content. Chen et al. (2025) conducted a latent profile analysis of TikTok users and identified distinct use types, including Passive Watchers with High Problematic Use Tendencies and Active Users with Low Problematic Use Tendencies. Some users scroll almost endlessly as passive viewers, while others actively create content and take part socially. The authors found that healthier well-being predicted membership in the Active group, while lower well-being, including anxiety and boredom proneness, predicted being in the more passive and problematic profile. This shows that TikTok engagement is not monolithic.

Uses and gratifications research finds that TikTok users primarily use the platform to seek fun, entertainment, and relief from boredom. Bucknell Bossen and Kottasz (2020) found that even among pre-teen and teen users, passive consumption was common and behavior was mainly motivated by amusement or affect. Omar and Dequan (2020) similarly found that TikTok usage was significantly predicted by archiving, self-expression, social connection, and escapism. In other words, people watch TikTok to be entertained, to express themselves, and to feel connected, often as a break from daily pressure. Scherr and Wang (2021) identified four core motives among Chinese users, namely socially rewarding self-presentation, trendiness, escapist addiction, and novelty. They also showed that daytime use was driven by trendiness, nighttime use by novelty, and posting videos by the desire for socially rewarding self-presentation. Schellewald (2023) summarizes this pattern well when he notes that shared escapist and entertainment motivations appear as common ground across user groups.

A defining feature of TikTok is its algorithm-driven feed, the famous For You page. Unlike traditional social networks, TikTok does not primarily show users content from friends. Instead, it serves an endless personalized queue of videos based on machine learning. Users quickly learn that the For You page is highly tuned to their tastes. Schellewald (2023) notes that viewers describe what they see as relatable, authentic, or close to home, closely matching their sense of self, taste, and current life situation. One user in Schellewald’s study said that TikTok’s algorithm “works exceptionally well” and “really understands me and knows what to show me” (p. 558).

Further, Bhandari and Bimo (2022) argue that unlike Facebook’s social graph, TikTok confronts each user with an algorithmised representation of their self. Lee et al. (2022) describe TikTok as an “algorithmic crystal,” a fragmented mirror in which users repeatedly encounter facets of their own identity. Barta and Andalibi (2021) found that TikTok is seen as uniquely for fun and authentic, partly because it allows even anonymous users to post unpolished, raw videos. As they argue, the design of the platform, including pseudonymous usernames and rough cuts, creates a condition in which users feel comfortable posting content of themselves that is unfiltered and more emotional than they would on other platforms. In practice, this means one encounters tongue-in-cheek memes, dance challenges, earnest reflections, and educational mini-lessons all within the same stream. Lip syncing, comedy skits, everyday vlogs, and participatory memes are especially common. Ordinary users become creative prosumers, iterating one another’s ideas in what Zulli and Zulli (2022) call an imitation public. These views, put together, capture the platform’s peculiar charm and its larger cultural force.

2.2. Precarity, Digital Labour, and Structural Constraints in Influencer Work

Social media influencer work has increasingly been examined through the intersecting frameworks of precarious labour, platform dependency, and structural inequality. Although popular discourse frequently presents influencers as independent entrepreneurs who transform visibility into economic mobility (Mohammed et al., 2026), some scholarly research paints a much grimmer portrait. Across the literature, researchers have described influencer work as often unstable, emotionally demanding, economically uncertain, and structurally constrained by platforms, advertisers, algorithms, and broader social inequalities. Duffy et al. (2023) note that creators operate within nested precarities emerging simultaneously from platforms, markets, and the broader creative economy. They note that influencers confront multiple, overlapping vulnerabilities, particularly because their livelihoods depend upon opaque platform infrastructures and volatile markets (Duffy et al., 2023). The authors observed that influencers are forced to adapt to systems they neither understand fully nor control. They are compelled to monitor engagement metrics constantly, modify posting habits, anticipate algorithmic preferences, and remain continuously visible in order to maintain economic viability.

The issue of visibility is inseparable from the broader political economy of platforms. Scholars increasingly argue that influencer labour is structured around the extraction of value from attention. The influencer economy depends on creators producing a continuous flow of content capable of sustaining engagement, advertising revenue, and data generation for platforms. Yet creators themselves bear most of the risk associated with this arrangement. Glatt (2022), in her ethnographic study of online video creators, describes influencer work as “continuous, exhausting, and highly competitive.” She argues that creators are expected to maintain persistent availability and self-promotion in environments where success is uncertain and unevenly distributed. Duffy et al. (2023) explain that while influencers frequently absorb the economic and emotional burdens of uncertainty, these platforms continue to profit from user activity regardless of whether individual creators succeed. Glatt (2022) also notes that the demand for constant productivity contributes significantly to burnout and emotional fatigue.

The literature further demonstrates that influencer precarity is not distributed evenly across creators. Race, gender, sexuality, and class significantly shape visibility, compensation, and treatment within the creator economy. Christin and Lu (2023), in their study of influencer compensation, identify what they call ‘the influencer pay gap’. Their research demonstrates that creators of colour are often paid less than white influencers despite comparable engagement metrics and audience reach. They argue that metrics are interpreted through “racialized assumptions about marketability and brand value” (Christin & Lu, 2023). This finding is particularly important because it undermines the assumption that platform metrics function as neutral indicators of worth. Christin and Lu (2023) further show that brands frequently rely on subjective perceptions of professionalism, relatability, and audience desirability when determining influencer value. These perceptions are shaped by existing social hierarchies. As a result, structural inequality becomes embedded within digital labour markets.

These questions of inequality and exclusion are also central to Bishop’s (2021) analysis of influencer management systems and brand safety technologies. The scholar argues that automated systems used to evaluate influencers often reproduce existing biases while presenting themselves as neutral tools of efficiency. She notes that “brand safety practices and influencer management technologies encode assumptions about acceptable identities and behaviours” (Bishop, 2021). Influencers who are perceived as politically controversial, sexually explicit, or otherwise risky may be deprioritised within advertising markets regardless of audience engagement. Bishop (2021) also demonstrates that platform infrastructures increasingly sort creators according to commercial desirability. These systems shape who receives sponsorship opportunities, who appears safe for advertisers, and whose content becomes economically viable.

Furthermore, Are and Briggs (2023) examine the experiences of creators who lost accounts, visibility, or monetization opportunities due to platform moderation policies. They find that deplatforming can have severe emotional and financial consequences because creators often rely on platform visibility for income and professional identity. In the study, creators described deplatforming as devastating, particularly because moderation systems were often experienced as inconsistent and difficult to appeal. The scholars further argue that moderation practices reveal how deeply creators depend on platforms for economic survival. A single moderation decision can interrupt audience access, sponsorship opportunities, and income generation simultaneously. Their work highlights how precarious digital labour becomes when employment conditions are governed through automated or semi-automated systems with limited accountability.

Lukan and Čehovin Zajc (2024), in their study of Slovenian influencers, introduce the concept of “platform lethargy.” Rather than portraying influencers as strategic entrepreneurs, they describe creators who engage with platforms in more limited and pragmatic ways. Their participants often relied on family support, secondary jobs, and diversified income sources rather than aggressive platform optimization. Thus, the authors argue that the survival of creators frequently depends on support structures outside the platform economy itself, which complicate the myth of self-sufficient entrepreneurial success in influencer work.

It is important to equally note that some scholars do not portray creators as passive victims. For instance, Fan (2025), in a study involving Instagram creators, argues that influencers often work both in and against the platform by developing sophisticated strategies for navigating precarious work environments. They diversify income, migrate across platforms, cultivate audience loyalty, and build informal support systems. Nevertheless, the existence of coping strategies does not eliminate the structural vulnerabilities because these adaptations mainly became necessary due to the persistent instabilities.

2.3. Empirical Research on the Influencer Economy

Existing literature on the influencer economy suggests broad agreement that success within the industry is shaped by the interaction between creator practices, platform logics, commercial relationships, and the conditions of digital labour. We attempt to unpack these four concerns in the following discussions.

Studies have identified content production and platform engagement as central drivers of influencer success. Hou (2018), using survey data, found that popularity is strongly associated with content diversity, originality, and audiences’ perceptions of innovation. Similarly, Xu et al. (2019) demonstrated that recommendation algorithms, audience demand, influencer collaborations, and participatory content practices collectively shape platform growth and user engagement. Together, these works suggest that success depends not simply on content quality, but on creators’ ability to continually adapt their production practices to changing platform dynamics.

Beyond content production, another strand of research examines how influencers convert online visibility into commercial value. Ruiz-Gómez (2019) argues that sustained audience attention is fundamental to online celebrity formation, while Brooks et al. (2021) show that celebrity status is actively produced through collaborations with brands, advertising agencies, and other industry actors. Alves (2020) extends this discussion by demonstrating that agencies play a central role in maintaining influencers’ marketability and personal brands. Likewise, Ibáñez-Sánchez et al. (2021) found that effective brand partnerships depend on audience fit, creative autonomy, transparency, and long-term collaboration. These studies collectively portray influencer success as a negotiated outcome involving creators, brands, agencies, and audiences rather than an individual achievement alone.

At the same time, growing scholarship has challenged the assumption that influencer work is inherently rewarding by drawing attention to its labour conditions. Drenten et al. (2020) show that monetization frequently depends on the commodification of identity and highly gendered forms of self-presentation. Bertaglia et al. (2021) similarly found that creators often rely on controversy and strategic self-moderation to sustain visibility, whereas Gault (2022) demonstrates that maintaining authenticity under constant audience scrutiny can generate significant emotional strain and burnout. These studies converge in portraying influencer work as a form of digital labour characterized by continuous performance, emotional investment, and economic uncertainty.

Research has further broadened this discussion by examining the wider creator economy and the risks embedded within platform-based work. Florida (2022) describes the creator economy as an expanding digital marketplace that offers new entrepreneurial opportunities while simultaneously producing income instability and market saturation. Phillips (2022) argues that platform business models often privilege engagement over user well-being, while Bushell (2022) highlights the reputational risks that arise from the speed with which criticism circulates online. Škripcová and Hladíková (2020) similarly identify the psychological pressures associated with sustained social media participation, and Alizadeh et al. (2023) demonstrate how platform reward structures can incentivize the spread of misinformation.

Although these studies have advanced understanding of influencer economies, they remain largely within contexts where platform monetization infrastructures are already established. Comparatively less attention has been devoted to creators operating in markets where official monetization programmes are unavailable, thus requiring influencers to develop alternative economic practices. Consequently, relatively little is known about how monetization strategies, platform constraints, and ethical tensions intersect under these conditions, thereby providing the basis for the present study.

3. Methodology

This study employed the qualitative research approach to explore the monetization dynamics of Nigerian TikTok influencers, with particular attention to the strategies they employ, the challenges they encounter, and the ethical dilemmas embedded in their work. According to Creswell and Creswell (2017), qualitative research is especially appropriate for examining under-researched phenomena because it enables a detailed understanding of participants’ perspectives. Given that TikTok monetization in Nigeria remains an emerging area of inquiry, qualitative research provides the flexibility to examine emergent themes that structured methods may overlook (Silverman, 2020; Danso & Mohammed, 2025; Elega et al., 2024). This approach also fits the interpretivist paradigm, which emphasizes understanding human behaviour within its social context (Pervin & Mokhtar, 2022; de-Lima-Santos et al., 2023). In examining creator practices, platform constraints, brand negotiations, and digital labour experiences, qualitative inquiry makes it possible to generate rich and contextualized findings that quantitative surveys alone cannot readily capture. Hence, qualitative research was considered the most suitable approach for uncovering the complex realities surrounding TikTok influencer monetization in Nigeria.

3.1. Data Collection and Purposive Selection of Participants

This study adopted in-depth interviews as the primary method for data collection in order to explore the monetization strategies, constraints, and ethical concerns associated with Nigerian TikTok influencers. Researchers have long regarded in-depth interviews as a suitable method for exploring participants’ attitudes, values, beliefs, and lived experiences (Adegbola et al., 2025; Osborne & Grant-Smith, 2021; Munoriyarwa et al., 2025). Participants were selected using purposive sampling, targeting individuals who had direct experience with TikTok influencing and could offer insightful perspectives on the subject matter. Participants were eligible for inclusion if they were active TikTok content creators based in Nigeria, had experience creating and publishing content on the platform, and had either earned income from TikTok-related activities (e.g., brand collaborations, promotions, or other monetization avenues) or possessed direct knowledge of the platform’s monetization practices. Omona (2013) similarly notes that purposive sampling remains a common strategy in qualitative research because it allows the researcher to select information-rich cases that are most relevant to the study.

A total of 23 participants, comprising TikTok influencers across different content categories, were interviewed. The sample was considered sufficient based on Hagaman and Wutich’s (2017) suggestion that qualitative research involving interviews generally requires between 20 and 40 participants to achieve data saturation. In our case, data collection ceased after the twenty-third interview when no substantially new codes or themes were emerging from successive interviews, indicating that thematic saturation had been reached.

The inclusion of participants with varied follower counts, content niches, experience levels, and locations was intended to provide a well-rounded understanding of how monetization is practiced across the Nigerian TikTok ecosystem. The participants included dancers, skit makers, fashion and lifestyle creators, vloggers, animators, actors, and street interviewers. Their years of experience also varied, ranging from less than one year to eight years, which provided the study with a broad perspective on both emerging and relatively established influencer practices. Table 1 presents the demographic profile of the participants. The choice to focus on participants with direct experience in content creation and monetization was deliberate, as it ensured that respondents could speak knowledgeably about the ways visibility, engagement, sponsorships, and digital labour intersect in the influencer economy. The instrument, an interview guide, was developed to capture participants’ accounts of monetization strategies, platform-based challenges, and related ethical dilemmas.

Table 1. Demography of Participants.

S/N	Age	Gender	Highest Qualification	Type of Influencer	Years of Experience	Location	Follower Count
Influencer 1	26	M	Graduate	Dance, transition and fashion	8 years	Abuja	1.4 million
Influencer 2	19	F	Undergraduate	Dance	1 year	Abuja	75,700
Influencer 3	19	F	Undergraduate	Lifestyle and Fashion	4 years	Abuja	8632
Influencer 4	18	F	A level	Lifestyle	2 years	Abuja	16,300
Influencer 5	20	F	Undergraduate	Lifestyle, hair, fashion	3 years	Lagos	21,900
Influencer 6	23	M	Graduate	Comedian	4 years	Abuja	165,000
Influencer 7	20	M	Undergraduate	Lifestyle and fashion	5 years	Abuja	2.3 million
Influencer 8	23	F	Graduate	Actor and dancer	3 years	Abuja	90,600
Influencer 9	24	M	Graduate	Interviewer	3 years	Abuja	84,700
Influencer 10	25	M	Graduate	Skit maker	5 years	Abuja	7.2 million
Influencer 11	25	M	Graduate	Animator	4 years	Abuja	860,400
Influencer 12	19	M	Undergraduate	Vlogging	3 months	Abuja	5000
Influencer 13	21	M	Undergraduate	Fashion and lifestyle	2 years	Abuja	22,300
Influencer 14	22	F	Undergraduate	Vlogging	2 years	Kaduna	42,000
Influencer 15	23	F	Undergraduate	Fashion and lifestyle	1 year	Abuja	80,000
Influencer 16	23	F	Graduate	Lifestyle and vlogging	2 years	Abuja	4900
Influencer 17	19	M	Undergraduate	Dance	1+ years	Abuja	49,600
Influencer 18	21	F	Undergraduate	Vlogger/Lifestyle	2 years	Lagos	30,100
Influencer 19	21	M	O level	Dancer	3 years	Abuja	19,500
Influencer 20	21	M	O level	Fashion and lifestyle	2.5 years	Abuja	112,200
Influencer 21	18	F	Undergraduate	Lifestyle/Storyteller	9 months	Abuja	42,000
Influencer 22	20	F	Undergraduate	Lifestyle/Tour guide	2 years	Abuja	6000
Influencer 23	25	M	Graduate	Street interviewer	2 years	Abuja	48,000

3.2. Interview Procedure, Ethical Considerations and Data Preparation

The interviews were conducted online using Microsoft Teams at a time convenient for each participant. Online interviews were considered appropriate because they enabled the researchers to reach participants located in different parts of Nigeria while providing a flexible and familiar environment for discussion. Each interview lasted between 35 and 50 min, depending on the depth of participants’ responses.

The interview guide consisted of open-ended questions designed to address the study objectives while allowing participants to elaborate on their experiences. The questions explored participants’ motivations for becoming TikTok influencers, their major sources of income, monetization strategies, experiences with brand collaborations, perceptions of TikTok’s monetization policies, challenges associated with earning income from the platform, strategies used to overcome platform restrictions, and ethical issues encountered in their work. Follow-up probing questions were used where necessary to clarify responses and explore emerging issues in greater depth.

Before each interview commenced, participants received information about the purpose of the study and were informed that participation was entirely voluntary. Their informed consent was obtained before data collection began, and they were assured that they could decline to answer any question or withdraw from the study at any stage without consequence.

With participants’ consent, all interviews were audio-recorded to ensure an accurate account of their responses. Following each interview, the recordings were transcribed verbatim by the researchers. Each transcript was subsequently reviewed alongside the original audio recording to correct transcription errors and ensure completeness. To protect participants’ identities, identifying information was removed from the transcripts, and each participant was assigned a unique identifier (Influencer 1 to Influencer 23), which is used throughout the presentation of the findings. The cleaned transcripts were then organized according to participant characteristics, including content niche, years of experience, follower count, and location, before the coding process commenced.

3.3. Data Analysis Procedure

The interview data were analyzed thematically o identify recurring patterns and shared meanings across participants’ responses. The process followed Charmaz’s (2014) thematic coding approach, which involves a systematic and iterative movement from raw transcripts to broader thematic categories. The process involved three stages: open coding, focused coding, and axial coding.

During open coding, the transcripts were read line by line and incident by incident so that the data could be broken into smaller analytic units. This close examination made it possible to capture participants’ meanings, actions, and assumptions without forcing them into pre-existing categories. For instance, when a participant described the need to post consistently, follow trends, and make content readable to the algorithm, this was initially coded as “algorithmic visibility” and “content legibility.” Similarly, statements about brand deals, region-based monetization barriers, payment problems, or account restrictions were coded as “monetization constraints,” “payment insecurity,” and “regional access barriers.” This open-ended process produced a wide range of preliminary codes that reflected the diversity of experiences reported by the participants.

In focused coding, the initial codes were reviewed, and the most significant and frequently recurring ones were retained as those that best captured the main patterns in the data. Codes were then clustered to form broader conceptual categories. For example, open codes such as “algorithmic visibility,” “content legibility,” and “trend responsiveness” were grouped under the sub-theme “Algorithmic visibility and content legibility.” Likewise, codes such as “monetization under platform constraints,” “payment insecurity,” and “regional access barriers” converged into the sub-theme “Insecurity and monetization under Nigerian platform constraints.” This process reduced the complexity of the data while retaining its richness.

At the axial coding stage, relationships among the sub-themes were examined in order to build clearer, compact, and higher-level themes that directly addressed the research questions. For instance, the sub-theme related to “emotional costs of visibility” was reviewed and broadened to cover wider issues of bullying, harassment, authenticity, and audience trust. This relational mapping clarified how platform logics, market pressures, and creator decisions intersect in the everyday work of Nigerian TikTok influencers.

Through this step-by-step process, the raw interview material was gradually transformed into codes, then sub-themes, and finally synthesized into the themes presented in the next section of this work.

To strengthen the trustworthiness and consistency of the analysis, two authors coded the transcripts independently and later compared their findings. Where differences in interpretation emerged, they were discussed openly until agreement was reached and code definitions were refined. Throughout the analysis, the researchers repeatedly returned to the interview transcripts to verify emerging codes, refine category definitions, and ensure that the final themes remained closely grounded in participants’ accounts. These regular discussions between the coders helped challenge individual interpretations throughout the analytical process. Although no formal statistic such as Cohen’s Kappa was calculated, given the interpretive and constructivist nature of the study, reliability was strengthened through negotiated agreement, continual reference to the data, and iterative refinement of the coding framework.

4. Data Presentation and Analysis

The interview data reveal that TikTok influencing in Nigeria is an economy of attention, visibility, adaptation, and survival. While the platform offers opportunities for self-branding, income generation, and empowerment, it also exposes creators to unstable monetization structures, payment frustrations, account restrictions, harassment, and the pressure to remain continuously visible. From our analysis, seven broad themes emerged. These are: visibility and content legibility; monetization under Nigerian platform constraints; networking, referrals, and collaborative growth; empowerment and livelihood making; influencer identity and microcelebrity formation; beauty and attention capital; and the emotional costs of visibility. Each of these themes helps to show how TikTok influencing in Nigeria is both enabled and constrained by the platform’s design and by the social and economic context in which creators work.

4.1. Visibility and Content Legibility

A major pattern in the data is the extent to which respondents understand TikTok as an algorithmically governed platform that rewards consistency, trend sensitivity, and content adaptability. The creators repeatedly described the platform as one in which visibility must be constantly earned through alignment with what the algorithm appears to prefer. This is consistent with Schellewald’s (2023) observation that TikTok’s recommendation system plays a central role in shaping what users see, and with Bhandari and Bimo’s (2022) and Lee et al.’s (2022) arguments that TikTok effectively offers users an algorithmized mirror of identity and taste.

We find that Nigerian creators are highly aware of this logic and respond to it strategically. Several respondents stressed that content must be more than merely expressive. It must be structured in a way that keeps users watching and coming back. One respondent insisted that “no matter who you are or the kind of video you’re making, you must have a storyline” [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. This shows that the content is produced with a narrative in mind, much like an organized and intentional work designed to meet the platform’s expectations for retention and engagement. Another respondent described TikTok in terms of content categories, saying that if a video is not “educating, entertaining or edutaining, people would not watch it” [Influencer 15, F, 23Y]. This reinforces the idea that the platform rewards content that combines value with pleasure, a finding that aligns with uses and gratifications studies that have emphasized entertainment, social connection, self-expression, and escapism as key motivations for TikTok use (Bucknell Bossen & Kottasz, 2020; Omar & Dequan, 2020; Scherr & Wang, 2021).

The respondents also emphasized the importance of consistency and adaptation. One creator explained that on TikTok, “you must show up every day” and that personal problems, sadness, or stress are not things the audience will wait for [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. She added that creators must follow updates and adapt to new features, such as creator search insights, or they risk being left behind. These statements illustrate a broader reality of platform labour: the creator is expected to remain continuously present, emotionally available, and technically responsive. That expectation is closely aligned with the literature on influencer work as exhausting, always-on labour in which creators are compelled to maintain visibility to remain relevant (Duffy et al., 2023; Glatt, 2022).

The algorithm also appears to shape not only what gets seen but how creators think about their own work. Several respondents described content performance in terms of trend cycles, timing, and uniqueness. One respondent argued that “there’s no necessarily new idea under the sun,” only new execution [Influencer 22, F, 20Y]. That statement suggests that creators see originality not as complete novelty but as creative differentiation within familiar formats. This is in line with Zulli and Zulli’s (2022) idea of an “imitation public,” where the platform rewards iterative participation and remix rather than entirely new expression. In that sense, Nigerian creators are participating in a culture of replication and adaptation that is central to TikTok’s creative logic.

4.2. Monetization Under Nigerian Platform Constraints

A second and very important theme concerns the difficulty of monetizing TikTok activity in Nigeria. We find that while creators clearly understand how to gain attention, converting that attention into stable income is far more difficult. This reflects the literature on influencer precarity, which argues that creators often work in unstable economies where platforms make profit consistently while individual creators bear the risks of uncertainty (Duffy et al., 2023; Glatt, 2022).

The Nigerian context adds a layer of constraint. Several respondents stated plainly that monetization options remain limited in the country. One influencer described discovering, after growing a very large following of 1.4 million, that his Nigerian account could not be monetized and that the experience felt like “collecting breakfast” (a local slang that simply means to be heartbroken) [Influencer 1, M, 26Y]. Another respondent explained that she had to pay someone in the UK to open an account so she could eventually qualify for monetization [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. These workarounds show how creators actively adapt to platform inequalities by using region-based strategies to bypass restrictions. This is an important empirical example of the kind of adaptation described by Fan (2025), who noted that creators often work both within and against platform systems to survive.

The interviews further demonstrate how monetization remains deeply tied to geography and infrastructural inequality. One respondent said that brands often hesitate when they hear “Nigeria,” and that the country’s location affects how seriously creators are taken [Influencer 15, F, 23Y]. Another explained that international payment systems such as PayPal and Cash App are not reliably available for Nigerian creators, which makes foreign collaborations difficult to complete [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. Payment problems were also presented as a major source of disappointment. Several respondents described delayed payment, underpayment, and outright non-payment. One creator said a brand still had not paid him long after he completed the contracted work [Influencer 6, M, 23Y]. Another explained that he preferred not to work on the assumption that payment would come after delivery because that model felt too risky [Influencer 20, M, 21Y]. Same respondent further described how brands sometimes attempt to negotiate from a place of power, offering very low amounts for multiple videos. These experiences are consistent with Christin and Lu’s (2023) findings on the “influencer pay gap,” which show that compensation is often shaped by unequal social judgments rather than objective performance metrics. They also support Bishop’s (2021) argument that influencer valuation is not neutral, but is filtered through perceived commercial desirability and assumptions.

What emerges from the interviews is that monetization is both possible and precarious. Creators can earn from brand work, sponsored posts, referrals, and promotional content, but they do so in an environment where platform access, payment systems, and brand attitudes remain precarious.

4.3. Networking, Referrals, and Collaborative Growth

Another major theme is the centrality of networking and collaboration. Creators do not simply post content and wait for an audience; they actively build ties, collaborate with peers, exchange referrals, and seek to benefit from one another’s audiences. This is consistent with the literature that frames influencer success as a product of collaborative practices, content partnerships, and audience alignment rather than isolated individual performance (Alves, 2020; Brooks et al., 2021; Ibáñez-Sánchez et al., 2021; Joshi et al., 2025).

Several respondents described collaboration as a growth strategy. One said creators can earn money by connecting brands or artists with other influencers and collecting commission for the referral [Influencer 9, M, 24Y]. Another explained that collaborating with people who create similar content helps expose each creator to a new audience, which then increases the chance of gaining new followers [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. These examples show that networking functions simultaneously as social capital and economic capital.

We also find that collaboration is a way of becoming known and building credibility. One respondent said the influencer journey had improved his networking skills by forcing him to speak to people he would not ordinarily approach [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. Another described receiving a brand opportunity after a friend recommended her behind the scenes [Influencer 13, M, 21Y]. In both cases, success depended not only on content quality but on personal relationships and informal reputation. This is especially significant in a context where geographic concentration can shape opportunity. For instance, a respondent from Kaduna noted that networking is much easier for him in cities like Lagos, Abuja, and Port Harcourt, where the creator ecosystem is denser [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. This adds an important spatial dimension to the analysis, which reinforces the argument in the literature that digital labour is shaped by social and geographic inequality (Duffy et al., 2023; Lukan & Čehovin Zajc, 2024), as we have seen even within a country.

4.4. Empowerment and Livelihood Making

A fourth theme is the role TikTok plays in youth empowerment and livelihood. Respondents repeatedly framed influencing as a practical way of surviving in a difficult economic environment. For us, this is a powerful finding because it shifts the discussion away from glamour and toward material necessity. For many of the respondents, TikTok is not merely a hobby or a reputation-building tool; it is a livelihood strategy. This fits into the creator economy literature, which describes digital platforms as spaces where individuals monetize creativity and personal branding, even though such income remains unstable and unevenly distributed (Florida, 2022; Phillips, 2022).

One respondent said content creation allowed him to make money while still in school and supported his long-term independence [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. Another explained that sponsored content and brand collaborations helped her earn money without having to do highly stressful conventional work [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. A third noted that social media earnings helped him buy his production gadget and gain recognition [Influencer 17, M, 19Y]. Another explained that she uses her platform to promote her hair business while also participating in her school’s ambassador program [Influencer 18, F, 21Y]. All these are examples that show how TikTok can serve as a bridge between student life, entrepreneurship, and self-support.

At the same time, the respondents placed this empowerment narrative in a broader context of Nigerian unemployment and institutional failure. One respondent said plainly that “there are no jobs in this country,” and that the youth must therefore make life liveable for themselves [Influencer 6, M, 23Y]. Another explained that content creation helped redirect him away from crime and toward a more genuine and self-directed source of income [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. TikTok, in the respondents’ accounts, is a place where they learn digital marketing, presentation, audience management, and brand negotiation. It thus contributes not only to income but also to capacity-building, which makes it an important platform in youth economic imagination (Škripcová & Hladíková, 2020).

4.5. Influencer Identity and the Making of Microcelebrity

The data also point to the way TikTok blurs the boundary between celebrity and influencer. The respondents understand that the platform has made it possible for ordinary people to become publicly recognizable and commercially valuable without going through traditional media industries. This is in line with scholarship on online celebrity and microcelebrity, which argues that social media fame is built through direct audience interaction, personal branding, and platform-specific visibility rather than through film, music, or sports alone (Ruiz-Gómez, 2019; Brooks et al., 2021). Be that as it may, one respondent contrasted influencers with celebrities by noting that celebrities remain recognizable even if platforms disappear, whereas influencers depend much more heavily on those platforms for visibility and income [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. This is an important distinction because it highlights the fragility of platform-based fame.

Another creator explained that when Don Jazzy (a prominent Nigerian music executive, producer, singer, and entrepreneur) made a post about her because of her TikTok activities, colleagues at work began treating her very differently, as if she had suddenly become a celebrity [Influencer 8, F, 23Y]. This shows how social media recognition spills into offline life and alters how creators are perceived in everyday settings. The literature suggests that this kind of influence depends heavily on parasocial interaction, audience trust, and perceived authenticity (Joshi et al., 2025; Ibáñez-Sánchez et al., 2021). The interviews support this point in the sense that creators do not just seek followers; they seek a relationship with an audience that recognizes them as accessible and credible.

4.6. Beauty and Attention Capital

Our sixth theme pertains to beauty and attention, especially the way physical appearance can function as a form of social capital on TikTok. Our interactions with the respondents show that they are acutely aware of the visibility advantages sometimes associated with attractiveness, especially for women. This connects with Drenten et al.’s (2020) argument that influencer labour often involves the commodification of identity, including bodily presentation, and with Barta and Andalibi’s (2021) observation that TikTok’s informal and raw aesthetic can make self-display feel more authentic and acceptable.

However, respondents equally noted that though attractiveness can quickly attract followers, beauty alone does not sustain influence [Influencer 12, M, 21Y]. Similarly, another pointed out that beauty can help content go viral, but that creators must then think strategically about what comes next, because looks alone cannot maintain a community [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. A third respondent said that if a creator is only “showing your face every day,” brands may not see enough value to work with them in meaningful ways [Influencer 16, F, 23Y]. We find these caveats especially important because they prevent the analysis from reducing beauty to a simple advantage. Beauty may create initial traction, but as these responses suggest, it must be transformed into content if it is to become economically useful.

4.7. The Emotional Costs of Visibility

The final theme is the emotional strain associated with public visibility. The interviewees shared that TikTok creators in Nigeria face bullying, body shaming, harassment, racism, and repeated exposure to hostile commentary. This is one of the clearest reminders that influencer work is not only economic labour but emotional labour. That finding fits Glatt’s (2022) description of creator work as exhausting and Duffy et al.’s (2023) argument that influencers operate within nested forms of precarity that include psychological strain as well as financial instability.

The hostile comments described by respondents were often highly personal, targeting body size, gender presentation, race, and perceived worth. One creator noted racist comments during live streams from users even outside Nigeria [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. Another described being insulted for her appearance and body shape [Influencer 3, F, 19Y].

Respondents further described different coping strategies. One said that he learned to see hate comments as evidence that he was becoming relevant [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. Another said that she initially cried but later learned to laugh off insults and reply with humour [Influencer 5, F, 20Y]. A third explained that she uses comment filters and moderation tools to block hateful words and reduce exposure [Influencer 15, F, 23Y]. These strategies show that creators are actively managing the emotional side of visibility, not simply absorbing abuse passively.

4.8. Summary of Key Findings

• What monetization strategies do Nigerian TikTokers employ?

The data show that Nigerian TikTok creators use a mix of brand partnerships, sponsored content, referrals, cross-promotion, self-branding, account-region bypass, and collaborative campaigns to generate income. Some creators build multiple accounts, use foreign-region access, or rely on contacts abroad in order to access monetization features unavailable locally. Others focus on brand work, commission-based referrals, or direct promotional deals. Put simply, we gathered that monetization is not a single pathway but a patchwork of strategies built around visibility, negotiation, and most importantly, improvisation.

2.

What platform challenges and market constraints do they encounter?

The major challenges in the data include Nigeria-specific monetization barriers, limited payment options, weak access to international payment systems, algorithm dependence, and brand distrust. Creators repeatedly said that being Nigerian is a factor that also affects how they are valued by brands and whether they can access monetization tools. Payment problems such as PayPal restrictions, Cash App limitations, fake alerts, and non-payment after delivery were also prominent. The interviews also show that even when money is available, creators must still manage delayed payment, low offers, and the possibility of fraud, which makes income uncertain and fragile.

3.

What ethical dilemmas are embedded in influencer monetization practices?

The interviews reveal several ethical tensions embedded in influencer monetization. These include the use of foreign contacts or region-switching strategies to access features unavailable to Nigerian creators; the manipulation or borrowing of analytics to appear more marketable to brands; and the risk of overpromising reach or influence to secure deals. This echoes Hofstetter and Gollnhofer’s (2024) observation that influencers’ “attempts to monetize … audience’s devotion can compromise their sense of psychological authenticity” (p. 429), particularly where commercial success encourages practices such as exaggerated claims or borrowed analytics. Put together, the findings from this research tell us that influencer monetization is a morally complex form of labour with both opportunities and several uncertainties.

5. Discussion and Conclusions

Our work contributes to the growing literature on TikTok and influencer labour by showing how a supposedly open and creative platform actually operates through systems that reward some forms of labour over others within disadvantaged settings. In this sense, the study extends the work of Schellewald (2023), Bhandari and Bimo (2022), and Lee et al. (2022). The findings equally give credence to scholarship on uses and gratifications by showing that the appeal of TikTok lies in its capacity to combine entertainment with education and social connection. Yet, the Nigerian case we analyzed suggests that we should not understand these motivations solely at the level of audience pleasure because they are also deeply tied to labour. The same features that make TikTok attractive to users (fast circulation, trends, personalization, and informal style) are also what creators must learn to manage and manipulate if they are to remain visible and commercially relevant.

Our findings also strongly echo the notion of platform precarities discussed in Duffy et al. (2023). We find that precarity in the Nigerian setting mainly arises from the fact that local creators face structural disadvantages in payment systems, brand recognition, and access to platform features that are more readily available elsewhere. This is where our findings speak directly to the political economy of platform labour because it draws attention to the fact that visibility may be global in reach but monetization remains deeply unequal in access. Whereas Duffy et al. (2023) primarily explain precarity through algorithmic uncertainty and platform dependence, our findings show that these vulnerabilities are compounded by geographical inequalities embedded within platform governance. This extends current understandings of digital labour by demonstrating that platform precarity is not shaped only by algorithmic systems. In Nigeria, and perhaps emerging markets alike, unequal access to monetization features adds another layer of insecurity to platform labour.

Another important area where our work contributes to the literature is collaboration and networking. We find that TikTok success in Nigeria is highly relational. Creators depend on referrals, cross-promotion, duets, shared audiences, and informal introductions to brands and opportunities. This supports the literature that presents influencer success as a collaborative process rather than an isolated one (Alves, 2020; Brooks et al., 2021; Ibáñez-Sánchez et al., 2021). At the same time, our data show that collaboration is not equally available to everyone. Creators in larger cities or better-connected networks appear to have more access to opportunities than those in less active local environments. This extends existing scholarship by showing that collaboration is not simply a strategy creators choose to adopt. Rather, access to productive networks is itself unequally distributed, which in turn shapes who is able to convert visibility into commercial opportunities.

The study further shows that TikTok is becoming an important livelihood space for young people in Nigeria. We find that many creators use the platform to support themselves financially, reduce dependence on family, and build opportunities around school or business, and this is consistent with Florida’s (2022) description of the creator economy as a growing space where empowerment opportunities abound.

Our findings also clarify the difference between celebrity and influencer. Several respondents described TikTok influence as something that depends heavily on audience engagement, algorithmic visibility, and constant online activity, which aligns with the literature on microcelebrity (Ruiz-Gómez, 2019; Brooks et al., 2021). However, the interviews further suggest that this form of visibility is fragile, since creators believe relevance can decline quickly once platform conditions change or their content loses visibility. On the issue of beauty and attention capital, several influencers made clear that beauty may attract an audience, but content quality, consistency, and strategic thinking are what sustain influence. Further, the emotional costs of visibility are clear throughout the findings. Creators face bullying, racism, body shaming, and public ridicule, often from anonymous accounts. This supports Glatt’s (2022) observation that influencer labour is exhausting and emotionally demanding. The findings also suggest that TikTok influencers in Nigeria should not be viewed as a single entrepreneurial category with identical commercial goals or income expectations. While some participants described content creation as their primary occupation and depended heavily on brand partnerships, commissions, and promotional campaigns for their livelihood, others used TikTok more strategically to complement existing businesses or salaried employment. Several participants were students or professionals who treated influencing as a secondary source of income, whereas others relied on the platform to attract customers to businesses such as fashion, beauty, or other commercial ventures. These differences point to multiple business models operating within the same creator economy.

Based on the present findings, three broad configurations can be identified and proposed. The first configuration is a creator-first model, in which influencing itself constitutes the primary occupation and principal source of income. Creators operating within this model consistently described the need to remain highly visible because their livelihood depends directly on sustained audience attention. As one participant explained, “you must show up every day” because “the algorithm will not wait for you” [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. Creators within this category develop content strategies centered on consistency, trend responsiveness, audience retention, and algorithmic visibility, since these directly affect opportunities for sponsored campaigns, promotional partnerships, and referral earnings.

The second configuration is a business-extension model, in which TikTok functions primarily as a marketing and customer acquisition channel for an existing enterprise. Rather than depending on influencing itself for income, creators within this model use content to strengthen businesses outside the platform. One participant explained that TikTok enabled her to promote her hair business while simultaneously participating in her university ambassador programme [Influencer 18, F, 21Y]. For these creators, audience engagement serves the broader commercial purpose of converting visibility into customer trust, product awareness, and business growth. Their content therefore places greater emphasis on showcasing products or services, demonstrating expertise, and cultivating customer confidence than on pursuing trends or maximizing algorithmic reach for its own sake.

The third configuration is a hybrid model, comprising creators who combine influencing with formal employment or education. One creator noted that content creation allowed him to “make money while still in school” [Influencer 12, M, 19Y], while another explained that influencing generated additional income without having to depend solely on conventional work [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. Because influencing represents one component of their economic activities, their content strategies are generally more selective and flexible, with posting schedules and collaborations often organized around commitments rather than the continuous pursuit of platform visibility.

This interpretation aligns with research by Ha et al. (2026). Drawing on a study of 500 social media influencers across 44 countries, the authors report that “less than one-third of creators reported content creation as their primary source of income” (p. 12) and distinguish influencers by follower size, noting that larger creators generally command greater commercial opportunities and bargaining power. Viewed alongside the present findings, this evidence suggests that influencers differ in their commercial priorities, income dependence, and relationships with brands, and therefore should not be viewed as pursuing the same business goals or operating under similar conditions.

Regardless of whether participants operated within the creator-first, business-extension, or hybrid configuration, those seeking to earn through TikTok’s native monetization system were excluded from TikTok’s Creator Rewards Program, meaning accounts created in Nigeria cannot receive the platform’s native view-based payouts (Modibbo, 2025; Amuge, 2025). One creator recalled the frustration of discovering that even after building an audience of 1.4 million followers, his account could not be monetized [Influencer 1, M, 26Y]. Another explained that she had to pay someone in the United Kingdom to create an account that would qualify for monetization [Influencer 14, F, 22Y]. These experiences reflect TikTok’s own policy. At present, TikTok’s main Creator Rewards Program remains available only in the US, the UK, France, Germany, Japan, South Korea, and Brazil (TikTok, 2026).

The platform also operates a separate Effect Creator Rewards programme, available in several additional countries, including Morocco, Egypt, and South Africa, that compensates designers who create viral effects and filters (TikTok, n.d.). Nigerian creators, however, remain excluded from all of TikTok’s official direct view-based monetization system. TikTok states that it is “always assessing opportunities to bring more value and growth to our global community” (para. 14), but does not indicate when this access will be expanded to additional countries. To get around this view-based payout barrier, some Nigerian creators set up TikTok accounts registered in eligible countries and link them to foreign-denominated bank accounts provided by fintech services such as Grey, Payoneer, or Wise to receive payments in multiple currencies (USD, GBP, EUR, etc.). As a participant noted, creators living in Nigeria can open a virtual US account, then link it to TikTok to receive payments in US dollars, and subsequently transfer the funds into their Naira bank accounts [Influencer 12, M, 19Y]. Other creative workarounds include using TikTok’s live gift feature (which is accessible in Nigeria). TikTok Live Gifts allow viewers to buy in-app coins and send virtual gifts during streams; Nigerian creators convert those gifts into cash and withdraw them (Njuguna, 2025). In practice, many creators simply avoid TikTok’s native fund altogether and rely on sponsored posts, live gifts, affiliate marketing, or driving traffic to YouTube or Meta platforms where ad revenues can be collected.

While the principal structural challenge identified in this study arises from Nigeria’s exclusion from TikTok’s native view-based monetization programme, the interviews suggest that these barriers extend beyond payment infrastructure alone. One respondent also explained that some foreign brands often became hesitant once they heard “Nigeria,” implying that national identity itself influenced perceptions of trustworthiness and commercial risk [Influencer 15, F, 23Y]. By contrast, collaborations with domestic brands appeared considerably less constrained, as payments are typically processed through local banking channels, without the cross-border restrictions associated with foreign payment systems.

Nevertheless, participants still described isolated instances of delayed payment, underpayment, and, in some cases, complete non-payment by local brands. One participant recalled completing a campaign but remarked that “till today I have not been paid” [Influencer 6, M, 23Y], while another explained that he now avoids agreements requiring content delivery before payment because the financial risk is too great [Influencer 20, M, 21Y]. However, it is important to note that these experiences point to contractual and bargaining challenges that may arise in individual commercial relationships, but unlike exclusion from TikTok’s native monetization programme, they do not represent a structural constraint affecting all Nigerian creators.

To conclude, we propose that addressing the structural exclusion of Nigerian creators from TikTok’s native monetization system requires action at both institutional and individual levels. At the institutional level, the Nigerian government should take a more active role in engaging global digital platforms such as TikTok to expand official monetization access for Nigerian creators and strengthen the payment infrastructure required for cross-border transactions. This would enable creators in Nigeria to participate more equitably in the economic opportunities offered by TikTok and reduce creators’ dependence on informal workarounds. At the individual level, creators can further diversify their revenue streams through cross-posting to more payout-friendly platforms such as YouTube, Instagram, and Facebook. For brand collaborations, creators should also adopt clearer contractual arrangements, negotiate payment terms upfront, and, where feasible, secure full or partial payment before content delivery to minimize the risk of delayed payment, underpayment, or non-payment.

We believe the findings discussed here have significant implications for future academic inquiry. For that reason, any serious discussion of the creator economy in disadvantaged settings must move beyond visibility and look closely at the conditions that make monetization and sustainability possible, unstable, or out of reach.

6. Limitations and Future Research

Our work has a number of limitations that must be acknowledged. First, the study is based on qualitative interviews, which means the results are rich and contextual but not statistically generalizable to all Nigerian TikTok influencers. A mixed-method study is recommended for future insights, because it could combine interviews with platform analytics, content analysis, or survey data to show not only how creators describe their work but also how their content performs over time. A second limitation concerns the geographical distribution of participants. Although we interviewed creators from Lagos and Kaduna, the overwhelming majority were based in Abuja. This is partly attributable to our purposive sampling strategy, through which we recruited participants who could provide rich, firsthand accounts of TikTok monetization. Also, as Nigeria’s Federal Capital Territory, Abuja attracts people from diverse ethnic, cultural, educational, and socioeconomic backgrounds across the country, which enabled us to recruit many creators from different backgrounds within a single location. Third, the study captures a particular moment in time. TikTok, its monetization structures, and its algorithmic environment continue to change quickly. What creators reported during the period of data collection in 2025 may not remain the same in future months or years, especially because platform rules, brand practices, and payment systems are subject to rapid change. Finally, comparative research across platforms would be valuable. Comparing TikTok with Instagram, YouTube, or X could show whether the challenges identified in this study are unique to TikTok or part of a broader pattern in the Nigerian creator economy.