A third of journalists are creator journalists, independently publishing news, commentary or other content outside of a traditional media organization, according to a Muck Rack study published Tuesday.

The study, which provides a snapshot of the state of creator journalism, found that out of 1,515 surveyed journalists, 522 self-identified as creator journalists. To compile the report, Muck Rack sent journalists in its database a survey in April. Most of the respondents were based in the United States, though the pool also includes journalists in the United Kingdom, Canada and India.

Half of the creator journalists who responded said they have been self-publishing for more than five years, signifying that the segment is quite mature despite narratives that creator journalism is a new, fleeting trend, said Muck Rack data journalist Matt Albasi, who compiled the report.

“It’s a much more entrenched segment within the journalism world than I expected,” Albasi said. “This is a thing that journalists have been doing and succeeding at to some degree for at least five years now.”

The primary reason creator journalists cited for self-publishing was “creative or editorial freedom,” with 57% choosing that as their main motivation. Thirteen percent said they were driven by “professional branding or career development,” and just 9% cited “financial opportunity.”

The vast majority of creator journalists, 75%, said that they cover similar topics to their main job at traditional news outlets. That finding, combined with the large proportion of creators who say they were driven by editorial freedom, suggests that creators are looking to tell stories that they cannot tell in the confines of their newsroom, Albasi said.

Very few creator journalists said their self-publishing work makes up the entirety of their income. Just 6% said self-publishing is their full-time income, and an additional 10% said it makes up at least half of their income. Nearly 40% said they make no money from self-publishing.

Similarly, few creator journalists have a large subscriber base. Only 9% have more than 50,000 subscribers across all platforms. A plurality of creators, 40%, have fewer than 1,000 followers. The report notes that 78% of creators have less than 10,000 subscribers, meaning that they are “nano influencers.”

“When I see the small proportion of creator journalists who are making money, what I see is a knowledge gap, more than anything, or a skill gap,” Albasi said. He explained that journalists coming from traditional news backgrounds likely did not have much opportunity to gain business skills and experience. “I think they just aren’t quite used to running their own business yet.”

Personal websites and email newsletters are the most popular formats for creators, followed by Instagram, LinkedIn and X. A plurality, 34%, said they publish two to four stories per week.

Creator journalists were more likely than noncreators to say that social media is “important” or “very important” to producing their work. While similar percentages of creators and noncreators reported that social media is important in promoting and distributing their work, 31% of creators said social media is very important to producing their work, compared to 19% of non-creators. More than 80% of creator journalists also said that at least some of their stories begin with public relations pitches.

The report comes at a time when the U.S. is losing newspaper jobs by the thousands, and audiences are increasingly consuming news venues outside traditional media outlets, like social media. Journalists are increasingly discovering that they can take advantage of self-publishing and distribution tools to sidestep legacy newsrooms and get information directly to audiences, Albasi said.

“I think creator journalism offers a chance to fill a lot of the gaps that have been left in news coverage and news media as we’ve had this sort of consolidation and shrinking of the traditional organizations,” Albasi said. “I think because of that, we’re going to continue to see this segment grow over the next five, 10, 15 years.”