Fandoms have more control over content than content-creators

The argument

Due to the way fandom can organize on social media, fans can affect a great degree of change in the content by which they subscribe. Take what happened before the release of Marvel's Captain Marvel. In 2019, internet trolls preemptively tried to leave negative feedback for the movie in an attempt to negatively impact the movie’s audience rating before it came out. Their efforts made Rotten Tomatoes, the website these reviews took place on, decide to disable comments for a movie until it is released. Here, fans of the Marvel community tried to ensure the movie's failure, and they did so by assembling en masse on Rotten Tomatoes to give it bad reviews. The implication here is that had these fans been successful, Captain Marvel would have seen a substantial drop in film ratings. In turn, another movie akin to it would likely never see the theaters because of how poorly received it was. While not successful, there exist other ventures that saw success. Upon the debut of the first Sonic the Hedgehog trailer, fans of the video game franchise took to social media to bash the titular character's appearance. Eventually, the sustained outcry from the Sonic fandom forced the creators of the film to redesign the character to give it a more appealing look. This instance displays the power of fandom at its height because fans were able to affect the change they desired by making known their grievances. Since fans are the target audience of films like these, content creators have little to no choice but to cave in to their demands to ensure their viewership. It is also safe to say that the fans know this as well and use this dynamic to their advantage. All in all, fandoms that are aware of this power dynamic between themselves and content creators take advantage of the dynamic to create their perfect movie, regardless of the developers' previous efforts and decision-making process to put out a completed product.

Premises

Counter-arguments

Despite what takes place in the social media landscape concerning fandom, there are cases where fandoms were not able to affect the change they desired. Some content creators do not get swayed by their fans' attempts to change the story. These instances can take place either in the form of creators willfully ignoring their fanbase and/or even spiting them outright. Mobile Suit Gundam 00 Director Seiji Mizushima knew early on that whatever story he told, he wouldn't be able to please all of his fans. As a result, the director wrote the story he wanted regardless of what he knew viewers would say. One can make the case the Mizushima knew well enough not to cave into his fandom's demands, or else he would have never released the anime. Thus he set out to tell his own story because he knew pleasing them wouldn't do him or his story any favors. Demonstrating a creator's choice to spite their fanbase's reactions, the situation concerning Adult Swim's Rick and Morty covers this strategy quite well. In response to the fandom's backlash to the creator, Dan Harmon, bringing in female writers, the writers (creator included) decided to dial the show's already extant commentary on toxic masculinity up 200%. Here, the creators of the show are subjected to the fans' negative pushback, with the fans hoping that this will make the creators phase out the current writers to fit their tastes. The only difference between what Seiji Mizushima did and what Dan Harmon did was that Harmon decided to confront the fans head-on for their crude behavior. Both actions undertaken by the creators would effectively beat back the toxicity of their fandoms and negate their power to make changes to the content they submit and feel is complete.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] The redesign is one case, and it was a commercial decision taken before release when the studio judged the change cheaper than the risk to its opening weekend. A producer responding to a market signal is ordinary in commercial entertainment; it is not an inversion of who controls the work. [Rejecting P2] The second example works against the premise. The review campaign failed, the film performed strongly, and the platform changed its policy in response — an instance of institutions correcting for manipulation rather than of fans exercising control. The premise also treats a coordinated troll campaign and a fandom as the same thing, when the argument elsewhere depends on distinguishing them. [Rejecting P3] "Little choice but to cave" is asserted, and the counter supplies the counter-cases: creators who proceed against fan demands, and instances where the loudest online constituency turns out not to be the paying audience. The conclusion does not follow either. Even granting that fandoms have unusual influence, the position claims that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages, and no premise weighs the other side — the sustaining of niche work, translation and subtitling communities, charity drives, or series kept alive only by organised fans.