Comment
Creators vs. Influencers: Who Should Brands Work With?
MUMBAI: Let’s get one thing straight, not everyone with a camera and an audience is a creator.
Over the past few years, brands have gone all-in on influencer marketing, pumping money into campaigns focusing on numbers, views, likes, and reach. But they’ve forgotten the essence of content creation somewhere along the way. The obsession with influencers has overshadowed the people who genuinely create, the ones who make content that audiences connect with.
At Creators Network, we didn’t just pick the word Creator for the sake of it. We genuinely believe in the art of content, not just the commerce behind it. If you’re good at your craft, money follows as a by-product. But if you start with just the commercial intent, chances are you’ll struggle to build real trust.
The Difference Between a Creator and an Influencer
It’s simple.
Influencers exist because of their audience. Their primary goal is to maintain engagement, grow numbers, and (let’s be real) sell products. And honestly? There’s nothing wrong with that, it’s a legit marketing model. But let’s call it what it is: a sales funnel in human form.
Creators, on the other hand, exist even without an audience. Their focus isn’t on “how do I sell this?” it’s “how do I make something I love?” And when you love what you do, an audience naturally follows. That’s why creators build communities, while influencers build followers.
Selling vs. Using – Why Gen Z Can See Through the BS
Here’s the thing: Gen Z is the most ad-resistant generation ever.
They don’t want to be told what to buy. They want to see how something fits into their life. Instead of “Here’s why this shampoo is the best,” they prefer “This shampoo saved me from a bad hair day before my date.”
See the difference?
And that’s exactly why creators work better for long-term brand relationships. When a creator genuinely uses a product, it doesn’t feel like an ad. It feels like a recommendation from a friend.
A great example: Kusha Kapila. You’ve seen her brand collabs, they never feel like she’s selling something to you. They feel like an extension of her content, a natural part of the world she’s built. And because of that, people watch them instead of skipping through.
Or take Bhuvan Bam. If he endorses a product, it doesn’t feel forced, because it’s seamlessly woven into his storytelling. He doesn’t push a brand, he makes it a part of his world. And that’s why it works.
Brands Need to Think Long-Term, Not Just Viral
Right now, most brands are still chasing short-term virality instead of long-term trust. They’ll work with an influencer for one campaign, squeeze out some impressions, and move on to the next. But the best brands, the ones that get it, invest in creators.
Instead of thinking, “Who can get us one million views this week?” they think, “Who can represent our brand for the next three years?”
Few brands have already started doing this, though. They choose long-term creator partnerships over one-off influencer deals because, ultimately, influence fades, but trust compounds over time.
So, Who Should Brands Work With?
It’s not about influencers vs. creators. It’s about short-term vs. long-term thinking. If you need quick clicks, sure, go with an influencer. But if you want brand advocacy that lasts, invest in a creator. Always ask yourself:
“Do we want an influencer for today or a creator for the future?”
Your answer will define your brand’s story.
Himanshu Arora is the founder & CEO, Creators Network & BookYourCreator. The views expressed in this column are entirely the author’s and indiantelevision.com need not subscribe to them.
MUMBAI: 2025 will be remembered as the year India’s OTT industry stopped chasing scale for its own sake and began reckoning with how audiences actually consume content. Completion rates fell, patience wore thin and the limits of long-form excess became impossible to ignore. In this guest column, Pratap Jain, founder and CEO of ChanaJor, traces how micro-drama moved from the fringes to the centre of viewing behaviour, why short-form fiction emerged as a retention engine rather than a trend, and how platforms that respected time, habit and emotional payoff were the ones that truly grew up in 2025.
If there is one thing 2025 will be remembered for in the Indian OTT industry, it’s this: the industry finally stopped pretending.
Stopped pretending that bigger automatically meant better.
Stopped pretending that viewers had endless time.
Stopped pretending that scale without retention was success.
What began as a quiet reset in 2023 and a cautious correction in 2024 turned into a very visible shift in 2025. Business models matured. Content strategies tightened. And most importantly, platforms started aligning themselves with how Indians actually watch content, not how the industry wished they would.
At the centre of this shift was micro-drama—not as a trend, but as a behavioural inevitability.
When OTT finally understood the time problem
For years, long episodes were treated as a marker of seriousness. A 45–60 minute runtime was almost a badge of credibility. Shorter formats were pushed to the margins, labelled as “snack content” or “mobile-only.”
That belief quietly collapsed in 2025.
What platform data showed very clearly was not a drop in interest—but a drop in patience. Viewers weren’t rejecting stories. They were rejecting commitment.
Across platforms, the same patterns appeared:
* First-episode drop-offs on long-form shows kept increasing
* Completion rates continued to slide
* Viewers were sampling more titles but finishing fewer
At the same time, shows with episodes in the six to 10 minute range started showing the opposite behaviour: higher completion, higher repeat viewing, and stronger daily habit formation.
Micro-drama didn’t win because it was short. It won because it respected time.
Micro-Drama didn’t arrive loudly. It took over quietly.
There was no single moment when micro-drama “launched” in India. It crept in through dashboards and retention charts.
By mid-2025, it was clear that viewers were happy watching four, five, sometimes six short episodes in one sitting—even when they wouldn’t finish a single long episode. Romance, relationship drama, slice-of-life conflict, and grounded comedy worked especially well.
This wasn’t disposable content. It was compressed storytelling.
In shorter formats, there was no room for indulgence. Every episode had to move the story forward. Weak writing was punished faster. Strong writing was rewarded immediately.
Micro-drama raised the bar instead of lowering it.
Where ChanaJor naturally fit into this shift
ChanaJor didn’t pivot to micro-drama in 2025 because the market demanded it. In many ways, the platform was already built around the same viewing behaviour.
From the beginning, ChanaJor focused on short-to-mid-length fictional stories that felt close to everyday Indian life—hostels, rented flats, office romances, small-town relationships, young people figuring things out. Stories that didn’t need heavy context or cinematic scale to connect.
What worked in ChanaJor’s favour in 2025 was clarity:
* A clearly defined audience
* Tight episode lengths
* Storytelling that prioritised emotion and pace over spectacle
While several platforms rushed to copy global micro-drama formats, ChanaJor stayed rooted in familiar Indian settings and conflicts. That familiarity mattered. Viewers didn’t have to “enter” the world of the show—it already felt like theirs.
Why audiences started responding differently
One of the biggest misconceptions going into 2025 was that audiences wanted shorter content because their attention spans had reduced. That wasn’t entirely true.
What viewers actually wanted was meaningful payoff per minute.
On platforms like ChanaJor, episodes didn’t waste time setting the mood for ten minutes. Conflicts arrived early. Characters were recognisable within moments. Emotional hooks landed fast.
A typical consumption pattern looked like real life:
* One episode during a break
* Two more before sleeping
* A few the next day
This is how viewing habits are built—not through marketing spends, but through comfort and consistency.
Viewers came back not because every show was a blockbuster, but because they knew what kind of experience to expect.
2025 was also the year OTT faced business reality
The other big change in 2025 was on the business side. Subscriber growth slowed. Discounts stopped hiding churn. Customer acquisition costs rose.
Platforms were forced to ask harder questions:
* Are viewers finishing what they start?
* Are they returning without reminders?
* Is this content worth what we’re spending on it?
This is where micro-drama began outperforming expectations. A well-written short series could deliver sustained engagement without massive budgets. It didn’t peak for one weekend and disappear—it stayed alive through repeat viewing.
Platforms like ChanaJor benefited because they weren’t chasing inflated launch numbers. The focus was on consistency and retention, not noise.
Failures Became Visible Faster
2025 also exposed weaknesses brutally.
Several platforms assumed micro-drama was a shortcut—short episodes, quick shoots, instant traction. What they discovered was that bad writing fails faster in short formats than in long ones.
Viewers dropped off within minutes. Episodes were abandoned mid-way. Weak stories had nowhere to hide.
Micro-drama didn’t forgive laziness. It amplified it.
The platforms that survived were the ones that treated short storytelling with the same seriousness as long-form—sometimes more.
OTT Stopped Chasing Prestige and Started Chasing Habit
Perhaps the most important shift in 2025 wasn’t technical or creative—it was psychological.
OTT stopped trying to look like cinema. It stopped chasing validation through scale and awards alone. It began behaving like what it actually is in people’s lives: a daily companion.
Platforms like ChanaJor found their space here because that mindset was already baked in. The goal wasn’t to dominate a weekend launch. It was to quietly become part of someone’s everyday viewing routine.
That shift changed everything—from release strategies to how success was measured.
What 2025 Ultimately Taught the Industry
By the end of the year, three truths were impossible to ignore:
* Time is the most valuable thing a viewer gives you
* Retention matters more than reach
* Format must follow behaviour, not ego
Micro-drama didn’t take over because it was fashionable. It took over because it fit real life.
Looking Ahead
Micro-drama is not replacing long-form storytelling. It is redefining the baseline of engagement.
Longer shows will survive—but only when they earn their length. Short-form fiction will continue to evolve, becoming sharper, more emotionally confident, and better written.
Platforms like ChanaJor have shown that it’s possible to grow without shouting—by understanding the audience, respecting their time, and telling stories that feel real.
2025 wasn’t the year OTT became smaller. It was the year it became smarter.
Note: The views expressed in this article are solely the author’s and do not necessarily reflect our own.
