The Creator Economy Doesn't Need Another Social Network. So Why Did Joseph Haecker Build Sxgram?

An independent editorial interview with Joseph Haecker, Founder of Sxgram and Editor-in-Chief of Only Fans Insider Magazine

Interviewed by Lila Monroe | Staff Writer, Only Fans Insider Magazine

Lila's opening

I have a confession to make. When Joseph Haecker first started talking about building another social network, my immediate reaction was that the world probably had enough places for people to post pictures of themselves.

Instagram exists. X exists. Reddit exists. OnlyFans, Fansly, and dozens of other platforms have already convinced creators to invest their time, content, and relationships in yet another digital destination. So when somebody tells me they've built a social network specifically for adults, my first question isn't what features it has. It's why anyone should trust another platform with their audience.

There's also an obvious complication to this interview. Joseph is my Editor-in-Chief at Only Fans Insider Magazine, and he's also the founder of Sxgram, which means the publication covering his company has a direct relationship with the person running it. I'm disclosing that relationship because readers deserve to know it, and because I've asked for the freedom to question Joseph the same way I would question any other platform founder.

I want to know whether Sxgram actually addresses the problems creators have been describing to me, whether fans have any compelling reason to use it, and whether the business model can survive without eventually reproducing the same incentives that frustrate people on mainstream platforms. I also want to understand what Joseph is building beyond the familiar collection of posts, profiles, subscriptions, and promotional promises. Most importantly, I want to know what happens when the interests of the company and the interests of its users stop aligning.

Joseph has agreed to answer my questions. I haven't agreed to make them easy.

---

Part One: The Problem You're Trying to Solve

Lila: Joseph, I want to start with the question I suspect a lot of creators would ask you privately. The internet already has an extraordinary number of social networks, and most creators are exhausted from trying to maintain a presence on all of them. Why did you look at that landscape and decide what the world needed was another one?

Joseph: Lila, I think that's a fair question, but I also think it exposes something fundamentally wrong with how we've come to accept social media. We have Instagram, Facebook, TikTok, X, LinkedIn, and countless other platforms, so on the surface, I understand why someone would question the need for another one. But my question is whether those platforms were ever designed to serve the entire adult population in the first place. Because from where I'm sitting, it's abundantly clear that they weren't.

The social networks we have weren't built to comfortably accommodate adult conversations, adult-oriented businesses, or even ordinary adult medical language. Why the hell should a gynecologist feel compelled to say "seggs" instead of "sex" when discussing women's reproductive health, just to avoid potentially triggering a platform's content restrictions? Why should a sexual wellness educator have to invent alternative terminology to explain basic human anatomy? And why should a legitimate business owner have to disguise what their company actually does simply to participate in a professional conversation on LinkedIn?

Think about how ridiculous that is for a moment. We're talking about platforms that claim to connect the world, empower entrepreneurs, and facilitate professional relationships, yet entire categories of lawful businesses struggle to communicate openly about their products and services. A woman can operate a reproductive health clinic, a company can manufacture sexual wellness products, and an adult content creator can run a legitimate business, but each may encounter restrictions simply because their work involves human sexuality. Somehow, we've accepted that as a normal cost of participating in the digital economy.

And I don't accept it.

I believe that if you're operating a lawful business, you should have the opportunity to market that lawful business. That doesn't mean you get to harass people, promote illegal activities, or disregard the rights and safety of others. It means that your profession shouldn't automatically disqualify you from participating in the same commercial opportunities available to practically every other industry. Yet that's precisely the environment many adult-oriented businesses find themselves navigating.

Now, I understand that Meta, LinkedIn, and other technology companies are private businesses with the right to establish their own community standards. I'm not arguing that the government should force Instagram to accommodate every category of content, nor am I suggesting that every platform must adopt the same policies. What I'm questioning is why we're continuing to invest our time, money, creativity, and audiences into environments that repeatedly communicate that our businesses aren't welcome. At some point, we have to recognize that the problem isn't necessarily how we're using those platforms; it's that those platforms were never intended to accommodate us.

And Lila, I'm not talking about something I've only observed happening to other people. I personally have to verify my Instagram account three to five times a day, and I'm not exaggerating about how frustrating that experience has become. I'm a digital publisher, an entrepreneur, and the founder of a social networking company, yet I repeatedly find myself having to prove that I should be allowed to access an account I've already established. You think I don't understand the message that sends?

Of course I do, and frankly, I'm tired of it. I'm tired of being treated like an unwelcome guest in a place where I'm contributing content, conversations, and engagement. I'm tired of watching entrepreneurs spend more time figuring out how to avoid account restrictions than figuring out how to grow their businesses. And I'm tired of an entire industry being told that the solution is to become better at navigating platforms that fundamentally don't want to accommodate what they do.

Imagine opening a restaurant and renting a storefront in a shopping mall, only to discover that the property manager doesn't particularly approve of the food you serve. They'll let you remain open, but you're not allowed to display your menu, advertise certain ingredients, or put up signs that accurately describe your business. Every few days, they lock your front door and demand that you prove you're authorized to operate, even though you've already signed the lease. How long would you continue investing in that location before deciding to move somewhere your business was actually wanted?

That's how I look at the relationship between adult creators and mainstream social media platforms. We've somehow convinced ourselves that the solution is to keep negotiating with the landlord, even when the landlord has repeatedly demonstrated that they'd prefer we weren't there. We teach creators which words to avoid, which images might trigger restrictions, and how to appeal account suspensions, as though learning to navigate those obstacles is an essential entrepreneurial skill. Meanwhile, the platforms continue benefiting from the content, audiences, and engagement those same creators generate.

And here's where my position might surprise some people: I actually want adult creators to leave Instagram, Facebook, X, and LinkedIn. I want them to stop building their professional futures around companies that don't respect the industries in which they operate. I'm not suggesting that someone should recklessly delete an established account tomorrow and abandon years of audience development without a transition plan. But I am saying that we should be actively working toward a future where those platforms are no longer necessary to our success.

Because why the hell would you stay in a room where you're not wanted and have repeatedly been asked to leave? Why would you continue begging for permission to promote your business when you could invest that same energy into building a community that actually welcomes you? And why are we so willing to accept that a handful of technology companies should determine which lawful industries deserve access to modern marketing and communication tools? Those are the questions that motivated me to start building Sxgram.

And since we're having an honest conversation, I'll say something that probably won't win me any favors in Silicon Valley. Fuck Mark Zuckerberg and the entire Meta suite, at least as far as my willingness to keep playing by their rules is concerned. I don't need Mark Zuckerberg's approval to operate a lawful business, and neither does anyone else. If Meta doesn't want our businesses participating in its ecosystem, then perhaps we should stop rewarding that decision with our attention, content, and advertising dollars.

What's fascinating to me is that social media companies have managed to convince people that the platforms themselves are responsible for creating their value. But Instagram isn't interesting because Instagram exists; it's interesting because millions of people contribute photographs, videos, stories, personalities, and conversations. X isn't valuable simply because someone built a place to publish short messages; it's valuable because people show up and participate in discussions. Without the people creating and consuming the content, these platforms are essentially empty pieces of software.

So why do we behave as though they're doing us a favor by allowing us to participate? We're the ones creating the content, attracting the audiences, developing the relationships, and generating the engagement that makes their businesses valuable. Yet we've become so dependent on their infrastructure that we're afraid to challenge the conditions under which we're allowed to use it. I think the adult creator economy needs to recognize the enormous collective value it already contributes to the digital landscape.

That's where Sxgram comes into the picture, but I want to make an important distinction about what we're building. Sxgram is social media for adults, not simply another social network for adult content creators. I want women's reproductive health advocates to be able to discuss reproductive rights, gynecologists to use accurate medical terminology, sexual wellness educators to talk openly about the human body, and SexTech entrepreneurs to introduce lawful products without disguising what they do. I also want adult entertainers to be able to promote their businesses without being treated as though their profession automatically makes them unwelcome.

And I want ordinary adults to have a place where they can enjoy adult conversations without everything being reduced to sexually explicit content. Someone might join Sxgram because they're interested in relationships, comedy, podcasts, lifestyle content, entertainment, entrepreneurship, or simply meeting interesting people. They might enjoy reading an interview with a creator without ever having any intention of purchasing that creator's content. To me, that's an essential part of building a genuine social community rather than another promotional directory.

Of course, creating a more welcoming environment doesn't mean abandoning responsibility. We're still talking about consenting adults, lawful businesses, appropriate community standards, and protecting people from exploitation, harassment, and illegal activity. I don't believe freedom of expression means freedom from accountability, and I don't believe adult-oriented platforms should operate without rules. But there's an enormous difference between establishing rules that protect people and establishing restrictions that effectively exclude entire categories of lawful human expression.

Now, as I began developing Sxgram, something interesting happened that expanded my thinking beyond simply providing an alternative social network. I started looking more closely at the business infrastructure surrounding the adult creator economy, and I realized that censorship was only one part of a much larger problem. We have an enormous industry built around people producing and monetizing content, but relatively little of the conversation focuses on helping those same people develop sustainable businesses and professional relationships. We've become very good at discussing how creators can make money from their next post, but not nearly as good at discussing what they're building for the next ten years.

Think about the difference between being a content creator and operating a content business. Creating content is an activity, while operating a business involves customer acquisition, marketing, financial management, intellectual property, professional relationships, and long-term strategy. A creator might employ photographers, editors, marketing professionals, and assistants while managing a substantial customer base and multiple revenue streams. By any reasonable business standard, that person is an entrepreneur, yet the industry often continues treating them primarily as someone selling access to photographs and videos.

My background is in marketing, customer acquisition, digital publishing, and developing business relationships, so I naturally look at these challenges from an entrepreneurial perspective. I've spent years helping businesses think about how they attract customers, establish credibility, and develop relationships that create opportunities for growth. One thing I've learned is that businesses don't necessarily grow because they produce more advertising or publish more social media content. They grow when the right people discover them, understand their value, develop trust, and have reasons to continue the relationship.

Yet the advice we constantly give content creators is to produce more content, post more frequently, engage with more accounts, and hope the algorithm rewards their efforts. If they aren't growing, we tell them to improve their hashtags, change their posting schedule, or experiment with a different kind of video. And while those tactics can have value, I think we've confused marketing activity with actual business development. A creator can spend every waking hour producing content and still struggle to develop the professional relationships that might fundamentally change their business.

That's why Sxgram has evolved into something more ambitious than a conventional social networking platform. We're connecting social publishing, editorial media, podcasting, professional identities, and business discovery into an ecosystem where those experiences can support one another. Through SxM Magazine, creators have opportunities to share their stories and establish identities that extend beyond their latest social media posts. Through SxRADIO, podcasters can bring their existing work into a social environment where listeners can discover the people and conversations behind the episodes.

What interests me is how those different experiences can create opportunities that might never emerge from a conventional social media feed. Someone could discover a creator through an interview, become interested in their entrepreneurial journey, listen to their podcast, and eventually develop a professional relationship with them. A business owner might discover someone whose expertise or audience aligns with a potential collaboration, even though neither person was actively searching for that opportunity. And a fan might discover an interesting personality through a story or conversation rather than encountering yet another advertisement for a subscription page.

I think that's an important distinction because I don't want Sxgram to become another platform where creators feel obligated to produce more content simply to remain visible. The last thing an already exhausted creator needs is another company telling them to post three times a day and engage with fifty accounts before breakfast. I'd rather create opportunities for people to get additional value from the work they're already doing, whether that's through publishing, podcasting, professional networking, or community participation. If someone already has a podcast, for example, SxRADIO's RSS import functionality allows them to bring their existing episodes into the platform without having to rebuild their entire catalog manually.

But I also want to challenge something about how we think about the creator economy itself. We spend an extraordinary amount of time discussing creators, but relatively little time discussing the people who make those creators' businesses possible. Fans aren't simply conversion metrics, subscription revenue, or wallets waiting to be opened. They're human beings looking for entertainment, connection, interesting personalities, meaningful conversations, and experiences they enjoy.

If Sxgram becomes nothing more than a place where every creator is constantly trying to sell something, then we've failed to build a social network worth participating in. People should want to visit because the community is interesting, the conversations are enjoyable, and the content gives them something worth exploring. They should be able to participate without feeling obligated to purchase anything, just as they can enjoy Instagram or X without making a transaction every time they open the app. I believe the commercial opportunities become more sustainable when they're built around genuine relationships rather than treating every interaction as an immediate sales opportunity.

And Lila, I know that all of this sounds ambitious, particularly coming from the founder of a relatively new platform. I'm not going to sit here and pretend that having a compelling philosophy automatically means we've built a successful business or solved the problems we're discussing. We still have to attract users, create meaningful discovery, establish financial sustainability, and demonstrate that participating in Sxgram produces experiences and opportunities people genuinely value. Those are difficult challenges, and I think creators have every right to be skeptical of anyone who promises that a new platform will magically solve their problems.

But I've never believed that the existence of a difficult problem is a reason to accept that it can't be solved. I believe that if something isn't working, we should be willing to question the assumptions behind it and explore a different approach. And I think one of the biggest assumptions we've accepted is that adult creators must continue depending on mainstream platforms, regardless of how those platforms treat them. We've become so accustomed to operating inside someone else's ecosystem that we've forgotten we're capable of building our own.

I want to change that relationship, not simply create another company that eventually exercises the same control over creators. I want Sxgram to earn its place by providing an environment where adults can communicate openly, creators can develop professional identities, businesses can promote lawful products, and fans can genuinely enjoy participating. And I want people to have the ability to build relationships and opportunities that extend beyond any single platform, including ours. Because replacing one form of dependence with another wouldn't be much of an accomplishment.

So, to answer your original question, Lila, I didn't look at the internet and decide that the world needed another place to scroll through photographs and videos. I looked at millions of adults, creators, educators, and entrepreneurs who were being asked to censor themselves or disguise their lawful businesses just to participate in modern social media. I looked at an industry that was generating enormous economic activity while remaining dependent on companies that often didn't want to accommodate it. And I decided that instead of continuing to beg for a seat at someone else's table, it was time we started building our own.

Ultimately, I don't want Sxgram to succeed simply because people are frustrated with Instagram, Facebook, X, or LinkedIn. I want it to succeed because creators, businesses, and fans discover that there's an environment where their participation is genuinely welcomed and where the relationships they develop can create meaningful value. I want people to stop feeling as though they have to ask permission to discuss adult subjects, promote lawful businesses, or participate in the digital economy. And perhaps most importantly, I want them to realize that they don't have to remain dependent on platforms that have repeatedly made them feel unwelcome.

That's why I'm building Sxgram, Lila. Not because the world needs another social network, but because adults deserve a social network that was actually built for them.

Lila: Joseph, you just made a pretty strong argument that adults shouldn't have to censor themselves or disguise their businesses to participate in social media. But I want to understand what that actually looks like in practice. When you say Sxgram is "Social Media for Adults," are you simply talking about an 18+ platform that welcomes adult entertainers, or are you proposing something broader? What conversations, content, and business activities should people expect to find on Sxgram that they might not feel comfortable sharing on Instagram, LinkedIn, or X?

Joseph: Lila, I think the first thing we need to do is separate the word "adult" from the assumption that everything involving adults must somehow be pornographic. Because that's exactly the kind of thinking that created the problem I was describing earlier. Somewhere along the way, we've allowed social media companies to treat perfectly ordinary adult subjects as though they're inherently inappropriate, and we've accepted that the only way to discuss those subjects is to disguise the language we're using. I think that's ridiculous, and I think it's time we started challenging that assumption.

When I say Sxgram is "Social Media for Adults," I mean exactly that. It's a social networking platform designed for people who are 18 years of age or older, where grown-ups can have grown-up conversations, share content intended for adults, and promote lawful businesses that serve adult customers. That includes adult entertainers and sexually suggestive content, but it also includes women's reproductive health, sexual wellness, relationships, sensual pleasure, body positivity, entrepreneurship, and freedom of expression. I don't believe those subjects should automatically be lumped together under some broad definition of inappropriate content simply because they involve sexuality or the human body.

Let me give you an example, because I think this is where the distinction becomes important. Imagine a gynecologist publishing an educational article about vaginal health, a sexual wellness company explaining the benefits of one of its products, or a woman discussing her personal experiences with menopause. Those are perfectly legitimate conversations, yet the people having them may feel pressure to avoid certain words, soften their language, or carefully consider how their posts might be interpreted by automated moderation systems. Why should a medical professional have to worry about whether the word "vagina" is going to create a problem when she's literally discussing the part of the human body she's trained to treat?

And it goes well beyond medical terminology. A lingerie designer should be able to discuss the sensuality of her designs, a relationship educator should be able to talk openly about intimacy, and a SexTech entrepreneur should be able to explain what their products actually do. An adult entertainer should be able to introduce herself, share her personality, develop relationships, and promote her lawful business without pretending she works in an entirely different industry. These are all adults participating in legal activities, and I don't think they should have to apologize for the nature of their professions just to maintain a social media presence.

Now, that doesn't mean Sxgram is intended to become an anything-goes environment where every type of content or behavior is acceptable. We're talking about adults, lawful activity, consent, and the responsibility to create a community where people can participate without being harassed, exploited, or exposed to illegal material. Being an adult doesn't eliminate the need for boundaries, and freedom of expression doesn't mean someone has the right to violate another person's rights. What I want to eliminate is the unnecessary stigma surrounding legitimate adult conversations and businesses, not the safeguards that protect people.

I also think it's important to distinguish between sexually suggestive content and the broader culture surrounding adult entertainment. Someone might share a glamorous photograph, discuss a provocative fashion campaign, talk about intimacy, or promote an adult-oriented product without necessarily publishing sexually explicit material. And even when content is intended for an adult audience, the question should be whether it's lawful, consensual, and permitted under the platform's actual content standards, rather than whether someone at a mainstream social media company finds the subject uncomfortable. I want us to establish clear boundaries that make sense for an adult community instead of forcing everyone to communicate through euphemisms and guesswork.

But here's something I really want people to understand, Lila. You don't have to be an adult content creator, work in the adult entertainment industry, or even consume sexually suggestive content to belong on Sxgram. You might be a comedian, a photographer, a podcaster, a journalist, an entrepreneur, a musician, or simply someone who enjoys meeting interesting people and participating in conversations. The defining characteristic of our community isn't that everyone produces adult content; it's that everyone is an adult, and we recognize that adults have a much broader range of interests and conversations than mainstream platforms sometimes seem comfortable accommodating.

I think that distinction is essential because I don't want Sxgram to become another place where every interaction is about selling a subscription. If someone joins because they enjoy comedy, they should be able to discover comedians and entertaining conversations. If they're interested in relationships or sexual wellness, they should be able to find people discussing those subjects openly and intelligently. And if they're interested in the business side of the creator economy, they should be able to discover entrepreneurs, publishers, podcasters, and professionals who are building interesting companies.

That brings me to another part of Sxgram that I think differentiates what we're building from simply creating a more permissive version of Instagram. We're connecting the social experience with opportunities for publishing, storytelling, podcasting, and professional discovery through features like SxM Magazine and SxRADIO. A creator can do more than publish a photograph and hope someone notices it; she can share her story, establish a professional identity, participate in conversations, and introduce people to different aspects of her work. And someone discovering her doesn't have to be interested in purchasing content to find her interesting.

For example, imagine an adult content creator who also happens to be an accomplished photographer, a business owner, a podcast host, or an advocate for a particular cause. On many mainstream platforms, she may feel compelled to separate those identities because acknowledging her profession could affect how her other work is received or promoted. On Sxgram, I want her to have the opportunity to present herself as a complete person rather than maintaining a collection of carefully sanitized identities. She should be able to discuss her business on Monday, share her photography on Tuesday, talk about women's reproductive rights on Wednesday, and publish a podcast on Thursday without feeling that one aspect of her life invalidates the others.

And I think that's especially important because people are so much more interesting than the categories we put them into. An adult entertainer might also be a mother, an entrepreneur, a college graduate, an artist, or someone with strong opinions about technology, politics, and culture. A fan might be a business executive, a healthcare professional, a musician, or someone who simply enjoys adult entertainment as one small part of an otherwise ordinary life. Why should those people be forced into separate digital identities simply because society has decided that certain interests or professions shouldn't comfortably coexist?

There's also a commercial side to this that I think deserves more attention. If you operate a lawful business, you should be able to explain what you sell, who you serve, and why someone might want to become your customer. That doesn't mean you should be allowed to deceive people, spam the community, or ignore applicable advertising and consumer protection rules. It means that an adult-oriented business shouldn't automatically be treated as less legitimate than a clothing brand, restaurant, fitness company, or any other business simply because its products involve human sexuality.

And that brings us back to something I said earlier about Instagram and Meta. I don't want Sxgram to become successful simply because people are angry about being censored elsewhere, because frustration alone isn't a particularly sustainable reason to build a community. I want people to discover that Sxgram offers an experience where they can express themselves more naturally, explore subjects that genuinely interest them, and build relationships without constantly second-guessing whether they're using the wrong word. The freedom to communicate openly is important, but the opportunity to connect with other people is what ultimately makes a social network valuable.

I also recognize that we have to earn people's trust, especially in an industry where creators have repeatedly been promised freedom by platforms that eventually introduce their own restrictions. I'm not going to claim that Sxgram will never have moderation challenges, difficult policy decisions, or situations where we have to balance competing interests. Those challenges are part of operating any community, particularly one that welcomes subjects other platforms often avoid. What matters to me is that our policies should be grounded in lawful conduct, consent, safety, and respect for adults rather than an automatic assumption that adult-oriented expression is inherently unacceptable.

And Lila, there's one more thing that I think gets overlooked in this conversation. When we force adults to disguise perfectly ordinary language, we're not necessarily making the internet safer; sometimes we're simply making it harder for people to communicate accurately. A woman looking for information about sexual health shouldn't have to decipher euphemisms to understand a medical discussion, and an entrepreneur shouldn't have to invent misleading descriptions of a lawful product just to explain what their company sells. I believe adults deserve better than an internet where we're expected to communicate like teenagers trying to avoid getting caught using a forbidden word.

So when someone asks me what they can actually do on Sxgram that they can't comfortably do elsewhere, my answer is that they can participate in an adult community without having to pretend that adult subjects, professions, and experiences don't exist. They can discuss sexual wellness, reproductive health, relationships, sensuality, and other grown-up topics using ordinary language, while creators and businesses can build identities around their lawful work. They can also participate in the broader social, editorial, and podcasting experiences we're developing without needing to be part of the adult entertainment industry at all. And they can do those things in an environment whose stated purpose is to welcome adults rather than reluctantly tolerate them.

Ultimately, Lila, I don't think adults should have to choose between participating in social media and being honest about who they are, what they believe, or what they do for a living. I don't think a gynecologist should have to say "seggs," an adult entrepreneur should have to disguise her business, or a creator should have to maintain a sanitized public identity simply to avoid making an algorithm uncomfortable. I want Sxgram to be a place where adults can speak like adults, participate as adults, and be treated like adults. Because to me, that's what "Social Media for Adults" should have meant all along.

Lila: Joseph, you've explained why creators need an environment where they're welcome, but there's still the question of who they're actually reaching. We've seen creator-friendly platforms turn into communities where everyone is promoting something and nobody seems to be buying. So how does Sxgram avoid becoming another echo chamber of creators marketing to creators? And what have you actually built to help people reach audiences beyond the platform itself?

Joseph: Lila, I think you're describing one of the biggest mistakes alternative social networks make. They build a platform, invite creators to join, and then expect those creators to attract an audience simply by posting more content. But if everyone on the platform is trying to sell something, who exactly are they selling to? That's not an audience acquisition strategy; that's a room full of entrepreneurs trying to sell to one another.

I actually witnessed a version of this problem while living in Tulum, Mexico, for over a year. Tulum is filled with expat yoga instructors, wellness entrepreneurs, spiritual healers, and life coaches who have built businesses around this beautiful lifestyle. But what I kept noticing was that they were all selling tickets to each other's retreats, workshops, ceremonies, and events. The environment was incredible, but the native local population simply wasn't large enough to sustainably support the businesses operating there.

And that's an important distinction because the problem wasn't necessarily the quality of their services. These were passionate entrepreneurs offering experiences that people genuinely valued, but they were largely marketing to other people who were also trying to sell something. You can create an incredible environment for entrepreneurs, but if you're not bringing new customers into that environment, you're just circulating the same money around the same community. That's precisely the problem I wanted to avoid when designing Sxgram.

And this is where I think people misunderstand what we've actually built. Sxgram isn't designed to keep everyone inside Sxgram. It's designed to help people get discovered outside of Sxgram. That's a fundamental difference in how we're approaching social networking, publishing, and audience development. Instead of relying exclusively on people scrolling through our social feed, we've built multiple ways for creators to distribute their content across the broader internet.

A creator can publish a social post, but that's only one part of the experience. They can also publish articles, get featured in SxM Magazine, participate in editorial interviews, and distribute podcasts through SxRADIO. These experiences create content that can be indexed by Google, shared on other social platforms, and discovered by people who may have never heard of Sxgram. We're not simply giving creators another place to publish; we're giving them additional ways to be found.

And our sharing features are intentionally built around that outward distribution. Creators can share their articles on Instagram, X, LinkedIn, Facebook, and anywhere else their audiences already spend time. We have featured to help them promote their podcast episodes, share their magazine features, and introduce their professional identities to people who aren't already members of Sxgram. The objective is to turn those existing platforms into distribution channels rather than remaining completely dependent on them as the destination.

Think about how different that is from the traditional social media model. Instagram wants people consuming content on Instagram, and LinkedIn wants people engaging with content on LinkedIn. Their business models generally benefit when people remain inside their ecosystems, but that doesn't necessarily align with what an independent creator needs. I want creators using the entire internet to build awareness of their work, while Sxgram provides a place where those discoveries can lead back to their profiles, stories, and businesses.

And the Google-searchable aspect is particularly important because it creates opportunities beyond the lifespan of a social media post. A photograph might disappear from someone's feed within hours, but an indexed article or podcast page can potentially be discovered through search long after it was originally published. Someone searching for a particular creator, subject, business, or professional perspective could encounter that content without ever opening Sxgram's social feed. That's a fundamentally different approach to visibility than simply hoping an algorithm recommends your latest post.

There's also an important privacy component to how we've designed this. Creators can establish their public identities using stage names or usernames rather than having to build their presence around their legal names. That means someone can develop a searchable professional identity, publish articles, share podcast content, and participate in editorial features while maintaining separation between their public persona and their private identity. For people working in adult-oriented industries, that distinction can be incredibly important, although it doesn't eliminate every privacy risk associated with publishing online.

And here's another thing I find interesting about the publishing model. When someone gets featured in a magazine, they're not simply receiving another promotional post; they're gaining a piece of editorial content they can share with their existing audience. That article can introduce readers to their personality, expertise, experiences, and business in ways that a short social media caption often can't. It also creates opportunities for their story to be shared beyond the original publication and potentially lead to additional editorial exposure.

I've seen the value of this approach through the digital publishing ecosystem I've developed with AmpLever. Our reported engagement data shows that when contributors share their published interviews, readers go on to explore an average of 4.7 additional articles. That's significant because the contributor isn't simply bringing attention to themselves; they're introducing their existing network to other people and stories within the publication. It's a model built around participants helping introduce new audiences to the broader community.

And that's the same principle we're applying to Sxgram, except we're connecting it to social networking, editorial publishing, and podcasting. Every creator who shares an article or podcast episode has the potential to introduce someone new to the ecosystem. Every person who discovers that content has an opportunity to explore the creator's profile and discover other people, conversations, and businesses. Instead of depending entirely on an audience that already exists inside the platform, we've designed the content and sharing experience to reach outward.

Now, that doesn't mean every article will rank on Google or every shared podcast will attract new listeners. Search visibility depends on competition, indexing, relevance, and a number of factors outside our control. But the important distinction is that we've built the infrastructure for external discovery into the publishing experience itself. We're not waiting until Sxgram reaches some magical membership number before creators can start introducing their work to the rest of the internet.

And our early profile data gives us some interesting context about who's participating. Among profiles that identify a professional category, approximately 36.2% identify as adult entertainers and 17.2% as content creators. The remaining 46.6% represent other professional categories, including publishers, photographers, podcasters, artists, entrepreneurs, and business professionals. That diversity matters because we're building an ecosystem where different participants bring different audiences, interests, and professional relationships.

We're also seeing participation across multiple countries, with approximately 54.4% of profiles that disclose a country coming from the United States, 15.8% from Brazil, and the remainder spread across other international markets. Our profile data has recorded more than 107,500 cumulative profile views, with a median of approximately 202 views per profile. Those figures don't tell us how many visitors became customers or professional collaborators, and I wouldn't pretend they do. But they do provide early evidence of people exploring profiles within the ecosystem.

So when you ask whether I'm solving freedom of expression, audience discovery, or sustainable business development, my answer is that we've designed those things to work together. Freedom of expression gives people a place where they can participate without disguising their lawful businesses, while our publishing and sharing infrastructure gives their work opportunities to travel beyond the platform. And when someone discovers that content, the creator's profile provides a place where that initial interest can develop into an ongoing relationship. That's the connection I'm interested in creating.

The lesson I learned in Tulum is that you can build the perfect environment for entrepreneurs and still fail if you don't have a way to bring customers into it. That's why I haven't designed Sxgram around the assumption that everyone who might become a fan or customer is already on Sxgram. We've built articles, magazine features, podcasts, searchable public content, and outward-sharing tools specifically so creators can reach people wherever those people happen to be. The platform is part of the ecosystem, but the entire internet is the potential audience.

And here's the irony, Lila. I absolutely want adult creators to stop depending on Instagram, Facebook, X, and LinkedIn for permission to operate their businesses, but that doesn't mean those platforms can't be useful distribution channels while we make that transition. Let them provide access to the audiences they've accumulated, while creators use their own published stories, podcasts, and professional profiles to establish an identity that isn't confined to someone else's feed. I'd much rather see creators use those platforms to direct attention toward their own work than continue investing everything into building someone else's business.

Ultimately, I don't want Sxgram to become another walled garden where creators are trapped trying to reach an audience that may or may not exist. I want creators to publish once, share broadly, become discoverable through search, and give interested people a way to learn more about who they are and what they do. We've deliberately built the publishing and distribution features around that philosophy, rather than treating external discovery as something we'll figure out later. Because I don't believe the future of the creator economy is another platform demanding everyone's attention; I believe it's giving creators more control over how their work is discovered and how their relationships develop.

Lila: Joseph, I think you've made an interesting distinction. You're not trying to keep creators inside Sxgram; you're building tools that help their content travel across the internet and bring new audiences back to them. But let's make this practical. Suppose I'm an OnlyFans creator with 80,000 Instagram followers, a paying subscriber base, and very little free time. My current strategy pays my bills, so why should I spend another thirty minutes a day on Sxgram? What exactly am I getting in return?

Joseph: Lila, you asked why an OnlyFans creator with 80,000 Instagram followers should spend thirty minutes a day on Sxgram. But I think you're asking the wrong question. Why should that creator spend thirty minutes a day on Instagram making Mark Zuckerberg money, when those same thirty minutes could be spent building something that creates more value for their own business?

Think about it. You spend thirty minutes creating content, responding to comments, and trying to keep Instagram's algorithm happy. Zuckerberg wants you doing that because your content keeps people scrolling, and the longer they scroll, the more opportunities Meta has to sell advertising. You're supplying the entertainment, building the audience, and doing the work, while Meta controls how much of that audience you can actually reach.

Does Meta pay creators? Sometimes, if they qualify for its monetization programs. But there's no guarantee of meaningful compensation, and Meta can generate advertising revenue from creator-driven engagement long before those creators receive a direct payout. You're working to grow your business, but you're also helping grow Zuckerberg's advertising business.

Now imagine spending those same thirty minutes on Sxgram. Instead of creating another disposable post, you could publish a shareable article, promote products through Product Cards, explore our Affiliate Program Marketplace, or create Hidden Posts that direct interested fans toward your existing paid subscription content. Your activity can also create opportunities for SxM Magazine coverage through milestones like viral posts, profile views, podcast appearances, and new content releases.

And here's the difference: we're not asking you to keep all that attention inside Sxgram. Our articles, magazine features, public profiles, and SxRADIO content are designed for outward sharing and potential discovery through Google Search. You can use SxLINKS to connect your existing business destinations and build your professional presence under a stage name. Those thirty minutes can go toward creating assets and opportunities that extend beyond a single platform's feed.

I'm not suggesting that thirty minutes on Sxgram guarantees more revenue than thirty minutes on Instagram. I'm saying the two platforms are designed around different priorities. Instagram's advertising model benefits from keeping people engaged on Instagram; Sxgram's publishing, sharing, and business features are designed to help creators turn their activity into opportunities across the broader internet.

So the comparison isn't thirty minutes on Instagram versus thirty additional minutes on

Sxgram. It's what you could accomplish by redirecting some of the time you're already spending feeding Zuckerberg's algorithm toward building your own business.

And if you've already got 80,000 Instagram followers, don't throw that audience away. Use it. Share your articles, promote your products, introduce your podcast, and give those followers reasons to connect with your business beyond Instagram. Make the platform you've spent years building an audience on work as a distribution channel for you, rather than remaining entirely dependent on it.

Thirty minutes building Zuckerberg's business, or thirty minutes building your own. That's the choice I'm asking creators to think about.

Fuck Zuck.

---

Part Two: The Fan Problem Nobody Talks About

Lila: Joseph, we've spent the first part of this conversation examining the creator's side of Sxgram: freedom of expression, audience ownership, monetization, and why creators should spend less time building someone else's advertising business. But there's another side to this equation that I think deserves just as much scrutiny. Creators don't simply need somewhere to publish; they need people who genuinely want to discover and interact with them. So let's turn the conversation around: Why would an ordinary fan join Sxgram if they weren't already following a particular creator there?

Joseph: Lila, I'm glad you're asking that, because I think the entire social media industry has lost sight of something pretty fundamental. Social media is supposed to be about the people using it, not just the people producing content. And somewhere along the way, we've turned social networks into advertising machines where the user experience has become secondary to keeping people engaged.

Look at Twitter, now X, for example. Maybe you joined because you wanted to keep up with your friends, follow your favorite restaurant, see what your local community was talking about, or get updates from a business you like. But suddenly your feed is filled with political arguments, outrage, pornography, and conversations you never asked to participate in. You came to find out what your friends were doing this weekend, and now you're scrolling through someone else's political meltdown next to a pornographic post. That's not what you signed up for.

And I'm not saying there's anything inherently wrong with political conversations or adult content. I'm saying there's something wrong with building a platform where people have no clear understanding of the experience they're walking into. If I walk into a sports bar, I expect sports. If I walk into a nightclub, I expect music, drinks, and adults having fun. I shouldn't walk into a coffee shop and suddenly find myself in the middle of a political rally or an adult entertainment convention.

Sxgram is exactly what the name suggests: Social Media for Adults. You know what you're walking into before you ever create an account. It's an 18+ environment where adults can have adult conversations, discover adult-oriented entertainment, explore relationships, follow interesting personalities, and engage with businesses and topics that don't always fit comfortably on mainstream social media. No pretending we're building a children's playground while quietly monetizing adult attention behind the scenes.

But here's an important distinction: being a social network for adults doesn't mean every conversation has to be about sex. Adults have interests beyond pornography, and frankly, I think reducing the entire adult experience to explicit content is pretty insulting. People are interested in music, relationships, sexual wellness, travel, entrepreneurship, podcasts, fashion, photography, and all kinds of subjects that become more interesting when people can discuss them without constantly worrying about whether they've used a forbidden word.

So why would an ordinary fan join? For the same reason someone joins any social network: because there's something interesting to discover and people worth connecting with. Maybe they find a podcast episode on SxRADIO, read an interview in SxM Magazine, discover a personality through Google Search, or follow an article someone shared on another platform. They don't have to arrive looking for a particular creator. They can arrive because a story, conversation, or piece of entertainment caught their attention.

And once they're there, I want them to have reasons to explore. They can discover creators, read articles, listen to podcasts, follow interesting profiles, participate in conversations, and find products or businesses that appeal to them. They might become a paying subscriber somewhere down the road, but that shouldn't be the price of admission to enjoying the community. A fan should be able to spend an hour on Sxgram, have a great experience, and never spend a dollar.

That's actually why the publishing side of Sxgram matters so much. When someone discovers an article about a creator, they're not just seeing another promotional photograph with a subscription link. They're learning something about that person's personality, experiences, opinions, or business. And that can lead them to discover other articles, other personalities, and other conversations they never knew existed. The goal is to make discovery interesting in its own right, not simply turn every interaction into a sales pitch.

And I think the name itself solves an important expectation problem. Nobody should join Sxgram and act surprised that adults are discussing sex, sexuality, or adult entertainment. That's part of the environment we've openly created, alongside plenty of other interests that adults have. We're not trying to disguise what we are to attract people who wouldn't otherwise be comfortable participating.

Now, does that mean everyone will want to join Sxgram? Absolutely not, and I'm perfectly comfortable with that. I don't need Sxgram to be everyone's social network, and I don't think every social network needs to appeal to everyone. I'd rather build a community where people understand the environment and genuinely want to participate than chase massive membership numbers by pretending to be something we're not.

So my answer is simple, Lila: fans don't need another platform where everyone is trying to sell them something. They need somewhere they actually enjoy spending time. Creators need audiences, but audiences need entertainment, discovery, conversations, and experiences worth showing up for. If we build an environment that people genuinely enjoy, creators have a much better opportunity to develop meaningful relationships with those people.

And unlike Twitter, where you might join to follow your favorite restaurant and unexpectedly end up surrounded by politics and porn, when you join Sxgram, you know exactly what you're signing up for.

Social Media for Adults.

No surprises.

Lila: Joseph, you made an interesting point about expectations. Someone joins Instagram to follow friends and interests, or X to keep up with the news, and suddenly they're being exposed to content they never asked for. You've argued that Sxgram is different because adults know what they're signing up for. But knowing what to expect is only half the equation. Let's imagine I'm a fan who enjoys following fitness personalities, comedians, models, podcasters, and adult creators. I don't produce content, I don't own a business, and I don't want to be constantly sold subscriptions. What experience have you designed for someone like me, and how is it different from opening Instagram?

Joseph: Lila, first of all, welcome to Sxgram. And here's the best part: You don't have to create content, sell anything, or spend a single dollar to belong here. You're an adult looking for entertainment, interesting people, and conversations worth having. That's what social media is supposed to be about, and somewhere along the way, I think we've lost sight of that.

The creator economy has become so obsessed with creators that we've practically forgotten about the fans. Nobody opens Instagram thinking, "I wonder how many subscriptions I can buy today?" They open it to laugh, discover something interesting, follow someone they admire, or simply kill a little time. And if we can't create an experience people genuinely enjoy, what good is having a platform full of creators?

Lila, remember the Hawk Tuah Girl? One street interview went viral, and suddenly the entire world wanted to know who she was, what her story was, and what she would do next. But how many people cared about the guy behind the camera who actually created the video? Now imagine YouTube had recognized that video going viral in real time, invited the creator to an interview, and published the story behind the phenomenon while the entire world was searching for answers.

That's exactly the kind of opportunity we've built into Sxgram. Our milestone triggers recognize activity such as viral posts and create opportunities to invite the people behind them to be featured in SxM Magazine. That interview becomes a public article designed to be searchable through Google, giving fans the context they're looking for while directing interested readers back to the original post. Instead of allowing a viral moment to disappear into yesterday's feed, we're creating a way for that moment to become an ongoing source of discovery.

Think about what that means. The viral post creates interest in the story, the published article gives people something new to discover, and that discovery can bring additional attention back to the original post. It's a circular discovery system connecting social engagement, editorial storytelling, and search visibility. Most social platforms are designed to capture the moment; we've built Sxgram to capture the story behind it.

That's what audiences want. Context. The story.

But let's take that a step further, because there's another problem with traditional social media that I think we're addressing, as far as followers and audiences go. Have you seen those comedy sketches from Dr. Squatch? They're entertaining, the branding is clearly visible, and you know the content is promoting Dr. Squatch products. I've watched that kind of content, enjoyed it, and remembered the brand, but have I actually bought Dr. Squatch deodorant? No.

Now imagine Dr. Squatch or the comedian posts that exact same sketch on Sxgram, but this time they attach a Product Card. While I'm watching the video, there's a product overlay in the bottom-right corner showing the deodorant featured in the campaign. I'm laughing at the sketch, I notice the product, and I click because I'm genuinely interested in learning more. Suddenly, that moment of entertainment has created a direct opportunity for me to become a customer rather than simply another view count.

Now, as an audience, I'm able to take action. I'm engaging. I'm moving out of the platform and shopping.

And that's a significant distinction because traditional social media advertising places enormous value on impressions, views, and engagement, even though those metrics don't necessarily translate into sales. With Product Cards, we're creating a more direct connection between entertaining content and the products associated with it. The creator has an opportunity to generate commercial value, the brand has a clearer path to an interested customer, and the fan has a convenient way to explore something they actually want. The content earns my attention, but the product has an opportunity to earn my business.

Now connect that with our Affiliate Program Marketplace, and the possibilities become even more interesting. Creators can explore affiliate relationships with businesses, incorporate relevant products into their content, and potentially earn revenue from recommendations rather than relying exclusively on subscription sales. A comedian can entertain an audience while promoting a sponsor, just as a fitness personality can introduce products that complement their content. The entertainment comes first, and the commercial opportunity is there when someone actually wants it.

But I want to be very clear about something: I don't want Sxgram to feel like a shopping mall where every creator is standing outside a storefront begging fans to open their wallets. You can follow comedians, fitness personalities, models, podcasters, and adult creators without ever buying anything. You can explore SxM Magazine, listen to SxRADIO, discover viral posts, and participate in conversations simply because you enjoy them. And when something genuinely interests you, whether it's a product, podcast, personality, or subscription, we've created ways for you to explore it further.

And unlike Instagram or X, we're not pretending to be everything to everyone. Sxgram is Social Media for Adults, and the name tells you exactly what kind of environment you're entering. You can expect adult entertainment, relationships, sexual wellness, comedy, music, entrepreneurship, and conversations that don't always fit comfortably on mainstream platforms. There are no surprises about the audience we're serving, and there's no need to disguise the fact that adults have adult interests.

Now, I'm not claiming that every viral post will become a successful magazine article or that every Product Card will generate a sale. Those outcomes depend on whether people find the stories, personalities, and products interesting enough to engage with them. But what we've deliberately built is an ecosystem that connects entertainment, discovery, storytelling, and commerce rather than treating them as completely separate activities. The objective is to create more value from the attention people are already giving to content they enjoy.

So, Lila, TikTok has mastered the art of getting people to watch the next video, but I'm much more interested in what happens after someone watches the video. What if they want to know the story behind it, follow the comedian, listen to the podcast, or buy the product they just saw? What if that one moment of entertainment could lead to a meaningful relationship, a new discovery, or an actual business opportunity? That's the experience we're building with Sxgram: Don't just capture someone's attention; give that attention somewhere meaningful to go.

Lila: Joseph, you've explained how Sxgram connects viral content, editorial coverage, and commerce to create opportunities beyond the social feed. But that raises another question: Who decides what gets seen? What does Sxgram's recommendation system actually prioritize today, and how do you prevent established creators from dominating while newcomers struggle for attention?

Joseph: Lila, I think one of the biggest problems with traditional social media is that popularity tends to create more popularity. The biggest accounts get the most attention, while newcomers struggle to get noticed. We haven't perfected that problem, but we've built Sxgram around giving users more control over what they see and creators more ways to get discovered.

First, we have algorithmic-based feeds that start with your interests. When you join Sxgram, we ask you to follow at least three content creators. Those initial choices help establish what appears in your feed, and the more people you follow, the more variety you'll discover. We also recommend content through secondary connections, introducing you to people and posts beyond the accounts you follow directly.

And here's why that matters. If you're here for comedy, follow comedians. If you're here for OnlyFans creators, follow OnlyFans creators. Your feed should reflect what brought you to Sxgram in the first place, not simply whatever controversy or viral argument happens to be generating the most engagement. The objective is to make discovery relevant to the individual rather than treating everyone like they want to see the same things.

But what about the creator who just joined and doesn't have an audience yet? We've built New Content Creator Discovery into our search results, giving newcomers another opportunity to be found. We've also created lower thresholds for SxM Featured Article invitations, along with New Content Drop interviews that can turn a creator's latest release into an editorial feature. That means someone can publish a post, get featured in SxM Magazine, and create additional opportunities for discovery beyond their social feed.

Creators can also publish their own articles, creating shareable, Google-searchable content that can direct interested readers back to their profiles. And with SxLINKS, our alternative to Linktree or Beacons, they can bring audiences from outside Sxgram into a single destination connecting their Sxgram profile and up to 20 external links. We're not asking creators to depend exclusively on our recommendation algorithm to grow their businesses.

Now, I'm not going to claim we've completely solved the visibility problem. Popular creators will naturally have advantages, and we'll need to continue evaluating how our algorithm distributes attention. But we've deliberately created multiple discovery opportunities through personalized feeds, secondary connections, search, editorial coverage, articles, and external sharing.

My goal isn't to build another popularity contest, Lila. It's to build a social network where fans have more influence over what they see, and creators don't have to become famous before they have an opportunity to be discovered.

---

Part Three: What Sxgram Actually Is

Lila: Joseph, in the first part of this interview, we explored why you believe adult creators need an alternative to mainstream social media, particularly platforms that profit from their content while restricting their businesses. In Part Two, we turned our attention to the fans, examining how Sxgram approaches entertainment, personalized discovery, and the stories behind the content people consume.

But now I want to understand the bigger picture. When I look at Sxgram, I see posts, stories, reels, long-form articles, SxM Magazine, SxRADIO, SxLINKS, Product Cards, and an Affiliate Program Marketplace. That's a lot of different experiences living inside one ecosystem. Are you building a social network, a media company, a creator-business platform, or an attempt to combine all three?

Joseph: Lila, let me be very clear about something. Sxgram is a social media network for adults. We're not OnlyFans, Fansly, or another pay-to-watch subscription platform, and we're not trying to become one. We're building a social networking experience specifically designed around the interests, lifestyles, and business needs of adults.

Think about the difference. Meta has to build products that accommodate everyone from teenagers to grandparents, which means its policies, features, and advertising standards have to serve an incredibly broad audience. LinkedIn has to maintain a certain level of professionalism because that's what its members expect. Neither environment was designed specifically for adults who want to openly discuss sexuality, follow adult entertainers, explore sexual wellness, or operate legitimate adult-oriented businesses.

Sxgram doesn't have to pretend to be everything to everyone. Our members are adults, and many are entrepreneurs operating perfectly legal businesses that simply don't fit comfortably within mainstream social media policies. They shouldn't have to disguise their professions, censor ordinary adult conversations, or constantly worry about whether promoting their businesses will get their accounts restricted. We know who our members are, and we're building the platform around their needs.

That's why we've developed features like SxM Magazine, SxRADIO, SxLINKS, Product Cards, Hidden Posts, and our Affiliate Program Marketplace. These aren't random additions intended to turn Sxgram into six different businesses. They're tools designed to help our members engage their audiences, increase discoverability, share their stories, promote their products, and connect people to the businesses they already operate. And importantly, many of these tools are designed to work beyond Sxgram through external sharing, searchable content, and links to existing platforms.

If you're an OnlyFans creator, we want to help you attract interested people to your OnlyFans business, not replace it. If you're a podcaster, we want to help people discover your conversations, not force you to abandon your existing podcast distribution. If you're a comedian, model, photographer, fitness professional, or adult-oriented business owner, we want to give you tools that make it easier to connect with the people who appreciate what you do.

And for fans, it's still social media. They can follow personalities, watch videos, discover interesting people, read articles, listen to podcasts, and participate in conversations without paying for access to someone's content. The business tools are there when they're relevant, but the social experience comes first. We're not building another subscription marketplace disguised as a social network.

So, Lila, I wouldn't describe Sxgram as three different businesses trying to coexist. We're one social media network, built specifically for adults, with features designed around how our members actually live, communicate, create, and do business. Meta builds for the masses, LinkedIn builds for professionals, and OnlyFans builds around paid creator subscriptions. We're building a social network for adults who deserve an environment that recognizes their interests and supports their legitimate businesses.

It's not about being everything to everyone. It's about being the right social network for the people we're here to serve.

Lila: Joseph, you've made an important distinction. Sxgram isn't trying to compete with OnlyFans or become another pay-to-watch platform. You're building a social network specifically for adults, with tools designed around their interests, their audiences, and the legitimate businesses they operate.

But I want to separate features from outcomes, because the creator economy has become very good at selling features. Having a podcast channel doesn't automatically create listeners, and having a magazine doesn't automatically generate meaningful exposure. Walk me through how a relatively unknown creator could join Sxgram and develop relationships, credibility, and commercial opportunities that didn't exist before.

Joseph: Lila, I love that question because nobody makes money simply because a platform has features. A podcast channel doesn't magically produce listeners, an article doesn't guarantee readers, and having a social media profile doesn't mean anyone knows you exist. The real question is whether those tools create opportunities that wouldn't otherwise exist, and whether people actually take advantage of them.

Let's imagine you're a relatively unknown content creator with a few hundred followers on Instagram. You join Sxgram, create a profile under your stage name, and connect your existing subscription platforms, website, and social accounts through SxLINKS. You now have a public-facing identity and a central destination connecting your business, including up to 20 external links. But so far, you've accomplished something pretty basic: you've created a profile.

Now you publish your first content drop. Maybe it's a photoshoot, a new video, a podcast appearance, or an announcement about something you're working on. Through our New Content Drop interview opportunities, that activity can lead to an invitation to be featured in SxM Magazine. Suddenly, instead of having only a social media post, you have an opportunity to tell the story behind what you've created.

And here's why I think that's important. A social media post tells people what you did; an interview gives them an opportunity to understand who you are. Maybe you talk about how you got started, what inspired the project, or what you're hoping to accomplish. That story becomes a public article designed for sharing and search discovery, giving people another way to find you beyond scrolling through Sxgram.

Now imagine you share that interview with the few hundred followers you already have. Some read it, some share it, and some explore your Sxgram profile to learn more. A photographer discovers your work and reaches out about collaborating, or a podcaster finds your story interesting and invites you onto their show. None of those outcomes is guaranteed, but the article has given people something more substantial to discover, discuss, and share than another promotional post.

And if that podcast interview happens, you've created another opportunity. The episode can become part of the discovery experience through SxRADIO, and the guest appearance can create another editorial milestone. Now someone might discover you through a podcast, read your magazine feature, and follow your profile. Instead of asking one social media post to do all the work, you've created several ways for people to encounter your story.

But let's talk about credibility, because I think that word gets thrown around far too casually. Being featured in a magazine doesn't automatically make someone credible, and I wouldn't want readers to confuse an interview invitation with an independent endorsement. What an interview can do is give someone an opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge, explain their work, and introduce themselves beyond a username and a profile picture. Credibility comes from what people learn about you and whether your actions support your story, not simply from having your photograph in a publication.

Now let's introduce the business opportunities. Maybe that creator is also passionate about fitness, beauty, fashion, or sexual wellness. Through our Affiliate Program Marketplace, they can explore opportunities to connect with businesses, while Product Cards give them ways to introduce relevant products through their content. And if someone becomes interested in their subscription content, Hidden Posts and SxLINKS provide ways to direct that interest toward the platforms where they already conduct business.

Here's the part I really want to emphasize, Lila. We're not asking this creator to become famous on Sxgram before any of these tools become useful. We've built New Content Creator Discovery into search results, lower thresholds for SxM Featured Article opportunities, and editorial triggers around new content drops. They can also publish their own articles and share those articles outside Sxgram, bringing interested readers back to their profile. Their opportunity to grow isn't limited to waiting for our algorithm to recommend their next post.

And the social network itself still matters. Our algorithmic feeds begin with the people members choose to follow, and we recommend additional content through secondary connections. That creates opportunities for someone to discover a new personality through the interests and relationships they already have. But the real value comes when that initial discovery turns into a conversation, a follow, a collaboration, or some other meaningful interaction.

Now, let's be careful about what we've actually demonstrated. I can explain the journey we've designed, but I can't honestly promise that an unknown creator will join Sxgram and suddenly land a sponsorship, attract thousands of followers, or build a profitable business. Those are outcomes that depend on the creator, the audience, the quality of the content, and whether the right people discover it. We've built the pathways; the relationships and commercial results still have to be earned.

But compare that with what most creators are doing today. They post something on Instagram, hope the algorithm shows it to enough people, and then start the process all over again tomorrow. On Sxgram, that same activity can become a social post, an editorial interview, a searchable article, a podcast conversation, or an opportunity to introduce products and professional relationships. Each experience creates another potential entry point for someone who didn't know the creator existed before.

So, Lila, the outcome I'm designing for isn't simply more followers. It's more opportunities for the right people to discover one another. A fan becomes a follower, a follower becomes a customer, a photographer becomes a collaborator, or a podcast conversation becomes a professional relationship. Those are the kinds of connections that can actually change someone's business.

And if a creator joins Sxgram, uses these tools, and still can't develop meaningful relationships or opportunities, then we need to understand why. Because you're absolutely right: Features aren't outcomes. They're only valuable when they help people accomplish something they couldn't accomplish before.

That's the standard I want Sxgram to be measured against.

Lila: Joseph, I think your last answer reveals something important about how you're approaching this business. You're not suggesting that publishing an article or appearing on a podcast automatically creates success. You're building multiple opportunities for discovery, with the understanding that the creator still has to turn that attention into meaningful relationships and business.

But that brings me to the money. You've described Sxgram as complementary to platforms like OnlyFans rather than a replacement for them. If you're not primarily trying to process fan subscriptions or compete for that revenue, where do you believe the greatest untapped economic opportunity actually exists? And why haven't established creator platforms pursued it more aggressively?

Joseph: I think the greatest untapped opportunity in the creator economy is actually pretty obvious once you stop looking at creators exclusively as people who sell subscriptions. It's the business being built around the creator, not just the content being sold by the creator. And I think the industry has become so focused on monetizing access to content that it's overlooked the much larger economy surrounding the people producing it.

Think about an OnlyFans creator with 80,000 Instagram followers. She might earn money selling subscriptions, but she's also a photographer's client, a makeup artist's customer, a potential brand ambassador, a podcast guest, a product affiliate, and someone with an audience that businesses would love to reach. She might have expertise in fitness, beauty, fashion, travel, or entrepreneurship. Yet most platforms look at her and see one thing: someone who can sell access to content.

I see a small business owner operating inside an entire economy of potential relationships.

And that's where I think the opportunity exists. Product recommendations, affiliate partnerships, sponsorships, professional services, editorial exposure, podcast collaborations, and business-to-business relationships are all potential sources of economic activity. Not every creator will participate in every opportunity, and not every relationship will generate revenue. But why should subscription sales be the only commercial activity we design the experience around?

Let's go back to the Dr. Squatch example. A comedian produces a hilarious branded video, people watch it, and the brand gets exposure. But what happens if that comedian can attach a Product Card directly to the content, giving an interested viewer a way to explore the deodorant being promoted? Now the entertainment has a potential path to a commercial transaction, and an affiliate arrangement could give the creator a financial interest in the result. Instead of treating the creator as advertising inventory, we're giving them tools to participate in the business opportunity their content helps create.

Our Affiliate Program Marketplace builds on that idea by creating opportunities for businesses and creators to discover potential commercial relationships. Product Cards connect relevant products to content, while SxLINKS gives creators a destination connecting their Sxgram presence to as many as 20 external links. Hidden Posts can direct interested audiences toward existing paid subscription platforms, and our publishing tools can introduce creators to people who might never have discovered them through a traditional social feed. These aren't separate business models competing with one another; they're different ways to connect attention with opportunity.

But I think there's an even bigger opportunity in professional discovery. Imagine a photographer discovering a model through an SxM Magazine interview, or a podcast host finding a guest through an article about their latest project. Imagine a beauty brand discovering a creator whose audience aligns with its products, or an event organizer finding a personality worth inviting to an upcoming convention. Those relationships can create economic value without requiring anyone to purchase a subscription or even watch a piece of paid content.

And that's why I keep coming back to editorial publishing. A creator can post a photograph, but an interview gives people an opportunity to understand their personality, experience, and professional interests. Our milestone triggers can turn viral posts, new content drops, and podcast appearances into opportunities for SxM Magazine coverage. That creates additional public, shareable content designed for search discovery, potentially introducing the creator to fans, brands, publishers, and professionals outside their existing audience.

Now, why haven't established creator platforms pursued this more aggressively? I think the simplest explanation is that they've built successful businesses around a very specific transaction, and their incentives naturally encourage them to optimize that transaction. If your primary revenue comes from taking a percentage of subscriptions or paid content sales, your business is going to focus heavily on helping creators generate more of those transactions. And there's nothing inherently wrong with that.

But helping a creator find a photographer, secure a sponsorship, sell an affiliate product, or get featured in a magazine doesn't necessarily generate revenue for a subscription platform. In some cases, those opportunities happen entirely outside its payment system. So while those relationships may be incredibly valuable to the creator, they don't always fit neatly into the platform's existing business model. That doesn't mean established platforms never support those activities; it means their core economics give them different priorities.

And I think that's where Sxgram has an advantage in how we're approaching the problem. We're not trying to replace the subscription transaction, so we don't have to organize the entire experience around it. If someone discovers a creator on Sxgram and subscribes to their OnlyFans, that's a positive outcome. If they buy a product, become an affiliate partner, book a photoshoot, or invite that creator onto a podcast, those are positive outcomes too.

The opportunity for Sxgram is to build a sustainable business around the infrastructure that helps make those connections possible. That could include commercial tools, marketplace participation, promotional services, and other ways businesses pay for useful opportunities as the ecosystem develops. But I want to distinguish the economic potential from revenue we've actually demonstrated, because building the tools doesn't automatically mean we've captured the market.

And here's something else I think the industry needs to recognize: A creator's economic value isn't limited to what their fans are willing to pay to see them. Their audience, professional knowledge, personality, creativity, relationships, and ability to influence purchasing decisions can all have value. Some of that value is commercial, and some of it comes from relationships that create opportunities later. Either way, it deserves more attention than simply asking how many subscribers someone has.

So, Lila, I don't believe the biggest untapped opportunity is finding another way to charge fans for content. I believe it's connecting creators to the much larger economy of products, services, businesses, and professional relationships that already exists around them. Subscription platforms are good at helping creators sell access to content, and I have no interest in pretending that business doesn't work.

I want Sxgram to help creators build everything around that business that makes it more valuable.

Because the creator economy shouldn't be defined exclusively by what creators can sell to their fans. It should also be defined by what creators can build, who they can work with, and the opportunities their audiences make possible.

Lila: Joseph, your last answer makes an interesting distinction. You're not trying to capture a percentage of every transaction a creator makes. You're trying to connect creators to a broader economy of professional relationships, products, services, and business opportunities that traditional subscription platforms aren't necessarily designed to support.

But I want to challenge the retention side of that strategy. SxLINKS lets users connect their existing platforms and business destinations, while SxRADIO allows podcasters to import their existing content. Those features make joining easier, but convenience isn't the same as value. Once someone has connected their links or imported their podcast, what gives them a reason to keep coming back?

Joseph: Lila, you're absolutely right. And this is why most social platforms fail. Making it easy to join a platform doesn't give someone a reason to stay. If all we've accomplished is helping someone import their podcast or organize their links, we've built a convenience tool, not a social network. And frankly, nobody needs another dashboard to check every morning.

But here's what I think people are missing about SxLINKS and SxRADIO. They're not destinations in themselves; they're connections to a much larger ecosystem. SxLINKS isn't just a page with up to 20 external links, and SxRADIO isn't simply a place to store podcast episodes. They're ways to connect the work someone is already doing to new opportunities for discovery, engagement, and professional relationships.

Let's imagine you're a podcaster who already has fifty episodes published. You import your existing RSS feed into SxRADIO, and now your podcast has another place where people can discover your conversations. But the real opportunity isn't the import itself. It's what happens when someone discovers an episode, visits your profile, reads an article about you, follows your work, or becomes interested in appearing on your show.

And remember our milestone-driven editorial features. A podcast guest appearance can become an opportunity for SxM Magazine coverage, giving the guest another story to share and the podcast another opportunity to reach people outside its existing audience. That article can link interested readers back to the conversation, while the guest can introduce the interview to their own network. One podcast conversation now has multiple opportunities to reach people who weren't originally looking for that podcast.

The same principle applies to SxLINKS. Imagine you're a creator with an OnlyFans account, a merchandise store, an affiliate partnership, and a podcast. You connect those destinations through SxLINKS, but you don't have to sit around waiting for someone to discover your link page. You can publish articles, share social posts, participate in conversations, and use SxM Magazine features to give people reasons to explore your profile and business.

And because SxLINKS can also receive traffic from outside Sxgram, you're not dependent entirely on our existing audience. You can share your SxLINKS page on Instagram, X, or anywhere else people already follow you, connecting that audience to your broader business. We're not asking creators to abandon the audiences they've built; we're giving them ways to make those audiences more valuable to their own businesses.

But let's get back to your actual question: Why would someone keep coming back? Because social networks are built around people, not tools. A podcaster might return because someone discovered their show and started a conversation, a creator might return because they received an editorial invitation, and a business owner might return because they found a potential affiliate partner. Those are reasons to participate that go beyond simply checking whether a link still works.

We've also built algorithmic feeds, personalized discovery, mentions, and notifications to help people stay connected to the conversations and personalities that interest them. Our search experience includes New Content Creator Discovery, while SxM Magazine provides opportunities around viral posts, profile milestones, and new content drops. These features create additional opportunities for people to discover one another and develop relationships through the activity already happening across the platform.

And that's an important distinction because I don't believe retention should mean convincing someone to waste another hour scrolling through content they don't care about. If a creator visits Sxgram because they've received an interview invitation, discovered a collaboration opportunity, or connected with a potential customer, that's a much more meaningful reason to return than simply feeding an algorithm. The objective is to make participation useful, not addictive.

Now, have we proven that these experiences create long-term retention? Not yet, and I wouldn't pretend otherwise. Having the infrastructure in place doesn't automatically mean people will develop relationships or keep returning. That's something we'll have to measure through actual participation, repeat visits, engagement, and the opportunities members generate.

But the strategy is intentional. SxLINKS connects your business. SxRADIO connects your conversations. SxM Magazine tells your story. And the social network connects you to the people who might actually care about all three. Each feature creates another potential reason for someone to discover you, engage with your work, or develop a relationship.

So, Lila, I don't expect someone to come back to Sxgram because they imported a podcast or connected twenty links. I expect them to come back when those connections start introducing them to people, conversations, and opportunities they didn't have before.

Because convenience might get someone through the door, but value is what gives them a reason to return.

---

Part Four: Media Exposure, Editorial Influence, and Conflicts of Interest

Lila: Joseph, we've covered a lot of ground. In Part One, you explained why you believe adult creators deserve a social network built around their needs rather than the restrictions imposed by mainstream platforms. In Part Two, we examined the fan experience and how Sxgram connects entertainment, discovery, and storytelling. And in Part Three, you walked us through the business infrastructure designed to turn those connections into professional and commercial opportunities.

But now I want to examine something that raises questions about the credibility of the entire ecosystem.

You own Sxgram, you're the Editor-in-Chief of Only Fans Insider Magazine, and Sxgram operates its own editorial publication, SxM Magazine. You're effectively building the platform, creating opportunities for media exposure, and participating in the publication of stories about the industry you're trying to serve.

So how should creators distinguish independent journalism, promotional opportunities, platform-generated editorial coverage, and paid marketing services across your businesses? And why should anyone trust that editorial exposure isn't simply another product you're selling?

Joseph: Lila, that's a fair question, and I think it's important to acknowledge the obvious. I own Sxgram, I'm the Editor-in-Chief of Only Fans Insider, and Sxgram has its own publication, SxM Magazine. Those relationships create potential conflicts of interest, and I don't think pretending otherwise serves anyone. But to understand why I've built these businesses, you first have to understand something I fundamentally believe: Access to media should be democratized, not controlled by a handful of gatekeepers deciding whose story deserves to be told.

Think about the average content creator. Most will go their entire careers without ever being featured in a magazine, not because they don't have interesting stories, but because they don't have the connections, publicists, or established audiences that traditional media often prioritizes. Meanwhile, the creators who do break through frequently make an entire career out of getting featured in one publication after another. They understand something incredibly valuable: Media exposure builds personal brands, and personal brands create business opportunities.

And that's not exclusive to adult creators. Entrepreneurs, photographers, comedians, models, podcasters, fitness professionals, and small business owners all benefit when people can discover their stories. An interview gives someone an opportunity to explain who they are, what they do, what they believe, and why their work matters. That story becomes something they can share with customers, potential collaborators, business partners, and audiences who might never have discovered them otherwise. A magazine feature isn't just publicity; it's an asset someone can use to build their personal brand.

So here's my question: Why the hell should a business owner have to jump through a bunch of stupid hoops just to get an opportunity to tell their story? Why should they need a publicist, a massive following, or the approval of some editor who has decided they aren't important enough to feature? We're living in an era where practically anyone can build a business, create content, and develop an audience, yet access to traditional media coverage remains unnecessarily difficult for many people. I think that entire approach deserves to be challenged.

That's why I've spent years developing publishing models that give people more direct access to media opportunities. Through Only Fans Insider and SxM Magazine, we're creating ways for creators and entrepreneurs to introduce themselves, share their experiences, and develop their public identities. Our contributor-driven interview approach allows people to participate in telling their own stories rather than waiting for someone to decide they're famous enough to deserve attention. We believe your story matters, even if nobody has heard of you yet.

And here's something that might surprise you, Lila. We don't believe creators should only get featured in our magazines. On Sxgram, we've created a More Ways to Get Featured section where we also welcome other magazines and their editorial opportunities. Think about that for a moment: we're actively creating visibility for opportunities to get published by other media companies, not just our own.

Why would we do that? Because our objective isn't to monopolize press coverage or convince creators that SxM Magazine is the only publication worth appearing in. It's to make access to media opportunities easier, regardless of who owns the publication. If another magazine wants to feature our members, I think that's fantastic. The creator benefits, the publication gets an interesting story, and the audience gets another opportunity to discover someone new.

Now, let's distinguish what that means from independent journalism, because I think this is where people get confused. Giving someone an opportunity to tell their story isn't the same thing as independently investigating their business. A creator interview, a member spotlight, an investigative article, and a paid advertisement can all be legitimate forms of media, but they serve different purposes. The responsibility of the publisher is to make those distinctions clear rather than allowing readers to assume every published story is an independent endorsement.

Only Fans Insider is an editorial publication covering the adult creator economy, while SxM Magazine is part of Sxgram's social networking ecosystem. SxM uses milestones such as viral posts, profile views, podcast appearances, and new content drops to create opportunities for member features. Those interviews are designed to introduce personalities, provide context, and help people develop their public presence. Being invited because your post went viral is an editorial opportunity, not a certification that you're successful, trustworthy, or somehow superior to another creator.

And the same distinction applies to paid marketing. There's nothing wrong with purchasing advertising, sponsored content, or promotional services, provided readers understand the commercial relationship. If someone pays for an advertisement, it should be identified as advertising; if an article is sponsored, that relationship should be disclosed. And if someone participates in a creator-submitted interview, readers should understand whose perspective they're reading. Paying for visibility should never be confused with purchasing an independent journalistic endorsement.

But I also want to challenge the idea that the only valuable media exposure comes from a journalist deciding you're newsworthy. A business owner doesn't necessarily need someone else to validate their existence before their story becomes worth sharing. Sometimes the most interesting perspective comes directly from the person who built the business, overcame the challenge, created the product, or experienced the event. That's why I believe contributor-driven publishing and independent journalism can coexist, provided we don't pretend they're the same thing.

And that brings us back to the conflict of interest you raised. Yes, I have a financial interest in Sxgram succeeding, and I have editorial responsibilities at Only Fans Insider. Readers deserve to know those relationships, especially when the publication is interviewing me about my own business. You should be able to challenge my claims, question our business model, and point out where we haven't demonstrated the results we're promising to pursue. This interview shouldn't become an advertisement simply because I happen to own the platform we're discussing.

At the same time, I don't think having a business interest automatically disqualifies someone from creating meaningful media opportunities. The question is whether the relationships are transparent, the content is accurately represented, and the audience can distinguish reporting from promotion. Editorial independence has to be demonstrated through actual decisions and practices, not simply claimed because a publication calls itself independent. And I believe our businesses should be held to that standard.

There's also a much bigger philosophical issue here. For decades, media exposure has often functioned as a form of permission: someone with access to a publication decides whether you're important enough for the public to hear about. I don't believe that should be the only model available, particularly when digital publishing gives us the ability to create far more opportunities for people to participate. Why should access to telling your story be reserved for people who already have access to the press?

Now, removing gatekeepers doesn't mean removing editorial standards, abandoning fact-checking, or giving everyone a free pass to publish misleading claims. Publications still have responsibilities, and audiences still deserve accurate information and clear disclosures. But those responsibilities shouldn't be used as an excuse to make ordinary entrepreneurs feel that their experiences aren't worth sharing. We can lower the barriers to participation without lowering our responsibility to readers.

So, Lila, I don't expect anyone to trust Only Fans Insider or SxM Magazine simply because my name is attached to them. I want people to evaluate what we publish, understand how the content was created, and recognize the difference between independent reporting, creator-driven storytelling, platform-generated features, and paid promotion. And I want creators to understand that getting featured isn't some mysterious privilege reserved for the famous. It's an opportunity to develop their personal brand, introduce their business, and share a story that might resonate with someone they haven't met yet.

I believe in democratizing access to media, removing unnecessary gatekeepers, and giving ordinary people the opportunity to build extraordinary personal brands. That's why we create editorial opportunities, why we welcome other magazines into our ecosystem, and why we've designed publishing to be accessible rather than exclusive.

Because at the end of the day, Lila, you shouldn't have to become famous before someone gives you the opportunity to tell your story. Sometimes telling your story is how you begin becoming known.

We believe your story matters.

Lila: Joseph, there's something compelling about your argument that people shouldn't have to become famous before they're allowed to tell their stories. You've also made an interesting choice by inviting other publications into Sxgram's More Ways to Get Featured section. That suggests you're more interested in expanding access to media than controlling every editorial opportunity yourself.

But democratizing access and distributing attention fairly are two different challenges. SxM Magazine can turn participation on Sxgram into opportunities for editorial exposure, including milestone-based recognition and automated invitations. Who determines which creators receive that attention, and what safeguards prevent editorial visibility from becoming a reward for purchasing services or generating engagement that benefits Sxgram?

Joseph: Lila, this is where I think automation can help eliminate some of the gatekeeping that's traditionally existed in publishing. Most of our editorial opportunities are triggered automatically, not selected by someone sitting behind a desk deciding who's important enough to get featured.

When a creator publishes new content, reaches certain profile-view milestones, has a post go viral, or makes a podcast appearance, our system can automatically trigger an invitation to be featured in SxM Magazine. We've also created lower thresholds for newer creators because I don't believe someone should already be famous before they get an opportunity to tell their story.

But we also have a Creator of the Month designation, and that's different. It's a human editorial decision based on multiple engagement factors and editorial discretion. The selected creator receives a more personalized feature with custom interview questions designed around their individual story, accomplishments, and experiences.

So there are two distinct approaches: automated editorial opportunities designed to broaden access, and human-selected recognition intended to highlight exceptional participation. Neither should be confused with purchasing advertising or an independent endorsement of someone's business.

Now, does automation eliminate every potential bias? Of course not. We determine the triggers, the thresholds, and the criteria. And engagement-based recognition can favor certain types of activity, which is why I think it's important to maintain opportunities for creators who haven't achieved massive visibility.

As for paid services, buying marketing should never be mistaken for earning editorial recognition. Sponsored content and advertising should be clearly identified, and readers should understand the difference between promotional placement, an automated member feature, and a Creator of the Month selection.

And remember, we don't believe SxM should be the only publication featuring our members. Our More Ways to Get Featured section also introduces creators to opportunities from other magazines. We're deliberately expanding access to press coverage beyond our own publication.

My philosophy is simple: Your story shouldn't depend on who you know, how famous you are, or whether someone personally decides you're worth interviewing.

Automation helps us open more doors. Editorial discretion allows us to recognize exceptional stories. And inviting other publications into the ecosystem gives creators even more opportunities.

We're not trying to become the gatekeepers of the creator economy. We're trying to remove the gates.

Lila: Joseph, you've drawn a clear distinction between automated editorial opportunities and the human-selected Creator of the Month recognition. I appreciate that you're acknowledging that even automated systems reflect the priorities of the people who build them.

But let's move beyond access to measurable results. What can you actually show creators about readership, discovery, referrals, and business outcomes? And what remains unproven?

Joseph: Lila, I think creators deserve more than promises of exposure. Exposure without measurable results is just a marketing claim.

We've built systems to track engagement with content, including article readership activity and profile views. We can see how people interact with parts of our platform, and we've created pathways connecting social posts, editorial features, podcasts, products, and external business destinations.

But here's the distinction: A profile view isn't a customer. An article read isn't a subscription. And a click doesn't automatically mean someone made money.

What we can demonstrate today is the infrastructure we've built, the engagement we're recording, and the opportunities we're creating for discovery. What we haven't conclusively proven is how consistently that activity translates into new customers, profitable partnerships, or sustained revenue growth for creators.

That's the next challenge: connecting discovery to meaningful business outcomes, measuring what we can responsibly attribute, and learning where the process breaks down.

And I don't want to confuse the two. We've built the pathways. Now we have to prove how much value travels through them.

Because ultimately, Lila, creators don't need another platform telling them they're getting exposure. They need opportunities that actually move their businesses forward.

Lila: Joseph, I appreciate that you're willing to distinguish between what Sxgram has built and what it has actually proven. That kind of transparency matters, especially when you're asking creators to trust both your platform and your publications.

But let's put that commitment to a more difficult test. If I investigate a complaint against Sxgram, uncover a serious moderation failure, or interview a creator who believes your company treated them unfairly, will you publish the story? What happens if my reporting conflicts with your commercial interests?

Joseph: Lila, you tell the story you believe the world needs to hear. It's my job to fix our errors.

I don't believe in telling journalists what they can or cannot cover, especially when the story involves one of my businesses. If someone believes Sxgram treated them unfairly, I want their story heard. If we've made a mistake, I want to know about it so we can make it right.

And let's clarify something. Only Fans Insider launched May 14, 2025. I didn't begin developing Sxgram until September 2025, and we officially launched April 30, 2026. Only Fans Insider wasn't created to promote Sxgram. It existed independently before Sxgram was developed.

Today, Only Fans Insider has a presence on Sxgram, but we maintain distinct publishing environments. Our magazine follows PG-13 and NC-17 content guidelines to keep its primary publication safe for work, while our Sxgram account allows us to publish more adult-oriented articles and exclusive content. We can maintain our editorial identity without restricting the conversations we're willing to have.

As members of the press, we believe in transparency and accountability. That includes holding my own businesses accountable. I don't expect journalists to protect my commercial interests, and I don't believe uncomfortable coverage is something a publisher should suppress.

My responsibility isn't to control the narrative. It's to take responsibility when the narrative reveals something we need to fix.

I've spent years advocating for the democratization of media and removing unnecessary gatekeepers. It would be pretty hypocritical to build an entire publishing philosophy around giving people a voice, then silence them the moment they criticize me.

So, Lila, tell the story. Even if it's about me. Especially if it's something we need to hear.

Lila: Joseph, your position is clear: journalists should tell the stories they believe matter, and your responsibility as a business owner is to address the problems those stories uncover. But principles are easy to defend in an interview. Would you commit publicly to an editorial policy that discloses ownership conflicts, separates paid placements from independent reporting, and protects journalists' ability to criticize Sxgram?

Joseph: Lila, absolutely. And frankly, I think that's a reasonable standard for any publication, including mine. Readers deserve to know who owns a publication, when commercial relationships exist, and whether they're reading independent journalism, sponsored content, or a creator sharing their own story. Transparency shouldn't be something we promise only when someone questions our credibility. It should be part of how we operate.

I also don't believe journalists should need my permission to criticize Sxgram or any of my other businesses. Their responsibility is to tell the stories they believe the world needs to hear, even when those stories make me uncomfortable. My responsibility is to listen, take accountability, and correct the problems within my control. I don't get to advocate for freedom of the press and then decide that freedom stops when the reporting affects my commercial interests.

So yes, I'm willing to publicly commit to an editorial policy that discloses ownership conflicts, distinguishes paid promotional content from independent reporting, and protects journalists from commercial interference. But I also recognize that publishing a policy doesn't automatically make a publication trustworthy. Trust comes from consistently demonstrating those principles, particularly when doing so comes at a personal or financial cost.

I've spent years advocating for the democratization of media, removing unnecessary gatekeepers, and giving people the opportunity to tell their stories. It would be incredibly hypocritical to build businesses around those beliefs and then become the very gatekeeper I've been trying to eliminate. If we genuinely believe everyone's story matters, we have to stand behind that belief even when the story is about us.

---

Part Five: The Business Model and Who Really Pays

Lila: Joseph, we've spent four sections examining why Sxgram exists, what fans actually gain, how creators can develop business opportunities, and whether your editorial ecosystem can operate transparently. You've argued that access to social networking and media exposure shouldn't depend on fame, connections, or gatekeepers.

Now let's follow the money. Sxgram has offered paid Verified Creator, Influencer, and Business accounts, alongside services designed to help members build their professional presence. What exactly are users purchasing when they pay for verification, and why should anyone believe those benefits are worth the money?

Joseph: Lila, Instagram and X are essentially free social networks, with optional paid upgrades and blue checkmarks. Sxgram takes a different approach. You can join, follow creators, discover content, and participate for free. But if you want to publish content, you need a paid Verified Account.

And there's a reason for that. Instagram can ban you for posting content that's perfectly legal but violates its policies. X currently allows adult content, but Elon Musk could change that policy tomorrow. I don't think adult creators should have to build their businesses around the unpredictable decisions of billionaires who can change the rules whenever they want.

We're building a social network specifically for adults, so we know exactly who we're designing it for. Requiring paid verification for publishing helps us establish that our publishers are verified adults, while supporting the infrastructure needed to operate a platform that welcomes lawful adult expression.

But you're not just paying for permission to post. Depending on your account, you're getting tools like SxLINKS, SxRADIO, Product Cards, editorial publishing, and affiliate opportunities. These are designed to help you build your personal brand, connect with audiences, and promote the businesses you already operate.

And let's be clear: verification doesn't buy popularity, guaranteed exposure, or preferential editorial recognition. It gives you access to tools and opportunities, but what you build with them is up to you.

Ultimately, Lila, Instagram and X built their businesses around monetizing attention. We're building Sxgram around giving adults a place to express themselves and the tools to turn that participation into opportunity.

I don't believe people should have to pay to enjoy social media. But I do believe there's value in paying for a platform that's intentionally built to support the content you create and the business you're trying to build.

Lila: Joseph, you've made an interesting distinction. Unlike Instagram and X, Sxgram asks people who want to publish to become paid, verified members from the beginning. You're arguing that creators should know what they're paying for upfront rather than discovering the real cost after they've built an audience.

But here's my concern. Social platforms have a history of attracting users with promises of discovery, then charging those same users to reach the audiences they helped build. If Sxgram becomes successful, what stops you from doing exactly the same thing?

Joseph: Lila, first of all, Sxgram is a business, and businesses need to generate revenue. We're not building a charity, and I'm not going to pretend we can operate a global social network on good intentions. Infrastructure costs money, development costs money, and supporting a growing community costs money. If we want Sxgram to survive, we have to build a sustainable business.

And frankly, I'd be an idiot to think we won't eventually get sued by small countries, rights groups, and random Karens from around the world. We're building a social network specifically for adults, including people and businesses that mainstream platforms often don't want to accommodate. That means we're going to attract criticism, regulatory challenges, and probably some expensive legal battles. We need enough revenue not only to support growth, but to defend the platform and the people who depend on it.

That's why we plan to introduce Boosted Posts and paid reach once our banking and payment processing relationships are in place. Creators need ways to expand their audiences and reach the follower and engagement milestones that matter when negotiating brand partnerships and business collaborations. And eventually, we want to introduce advertising revenue opportunities that allow creators to participate financially in the attention their content generates.

But there's a difference between selling someone additional reach and deliberately taking away the reach they've already earned. I don't want to build a platform that forces creators to pay just to communicate with their existing followers. I want to build one where businesses can purchase advertising, creators can invest in growth, and members can continue developing relationships organically.

And let's be realistic. If Sxgram becomes successful, our expenses and responsibilities will grow right alongside our audience. We need to fund technology, moderation, security, customer support, and the legal resources required to defend a platform that welcomes lawful adult expression. Financial sustainability isn't separate from protecting our community. It's what makes that protection possible.

So, Lila, I'm not going to apologize for wanting Sxgram to make money. I want us to make enough money to grow, pay creators, withstand legal challenges, and still be here ten years from now.

Because building a social network for adults is one thing. Building one that can survive the people who want to shut it down is an entirely different challenge.

Lila: So you're not pretending Sxgram is a charity. You expect advertising revenue, legal challenges, and the enormous costs of operating a social network for adults. That's a more realistic answer than promising everything will always be free.

But let's talk about your Affiliate Program Marketplace. You're connecting creators with brands without taking a commission from their affiliate earnings. That's great for creators, but where's the money for Sxgram? And what stops you from changing the deal once creators depend on it?

Joseph: Lila, we didn't launch the Affiliate Program Marketplace to generate revenue. We launched it to solve a problem that nobody seems to be addressing.

Right now, most mainstream businesses don't know how to work with adult content creators. They see the industry, they see the audiences, but they don't understand how to build partnerships with creators whose businesses revolve around growing subscriber counts. Meanwhile, many creators are so focused on subscription revenue that they've never really explored what brand partnerships could mean for their businesses.

And that's a huge disconnect. These creators have audiences, influence, and the ability to introduce products to consumers. Brands have products, affiliate programs, and marketing budgets. But the two sides aren't having enough conversations about how they could work together.

That's why we built the marketplace. We're creating a bridge between brands and content creators. We're not taking a commission from their affiliate earnings because that's not the point. We want creators to discover new revenue opportunities beyond subscriptions, and we want brands to start recognizing the commercial value of working with them.

Eventually, those relationships could help support the digital advertising programs we plan to introduce on Sxgram. If businesses begin seeing value in these partnerships, it creates a foundation for broader advertising opportunities that could benefit both the platform and its creators.

But we're not there yet, and I'm not going to pretend we are. Right now, our priority is getting brands and creators connected, working together, and learning how to create value for one another.

Because, Lila, before you can build an advertising economy around a community, you have to help businesses recognize that community as a market worth investing in.

Lila: So the Affiliate Program Marketplace isn't really about commissions. You're trying to change how two industries do business with each other, and you're willing to invest in those relationships before they generate advertising revenue.

But that brings me to another question. You've offered referral incentives and complimentary verification upgrades to attract members. How much of Sxgram's growth reflects genuine interest, and how much is simply people showing up for something free? More importantly, how do you know who's actually sticking around?

Joseph: Dang, Lila, you're hitting me with some pretty hard questions here. But I appreciate that, because these are exactly the questions people should be asking anyone building a social network.

Here's something interesting. Since launching Sxgram in April, we've only had two paid creators cancel their memberships. And neither removed their content from the platform. Their profiles and contributions remained part of the community.

In fact, one of those creators went on to become our very first Creator of the Month for SxM Magazine. And here's the interesting part: one of the benefits of receiving that recognition is a complimentary lifetime Verified Account upgrade. So someone who canceled their paid membership ultimately earned lifetime access through their participation and recognition.

Now, does that mean we've solved retention? Of course not. We're still a young platform, and two cancellations alone don't tell the entire story. We need to understand how frequently members return, how they engage, and whether they're finding enough value to continue participating.

But I don't measure success simply by how many people sign up or how many subscriptions we sell. I'm interested in whether people are building something meaningful through Sxgram, whether that's an audience, a personal brand, a business relationship, or an opportunity they didn't have before.

And Lila, if someone contributes enough to our community to earn Creator of the Month, I think recognizing that contribution with a lifetime upgrade makes a lot more sense than sending them another subscription invoice.

Lila: Two cancellations since April is an interesting early retention signal, especially when one of those creators went on to become SxM Magazine's first Creator of the Month. But as you've acknowledged, retention alone doesn't establish financial stability.

And that brings me to something potentially more threatening than competition. Adult-oriented businesses can lose banking and payment processing relationships overnight. What financial infrastructure is keeping Sxgram operating today, and what happens to your creators if a financial institution decides it doesn't want your business?

Joseph: Lila, you're asking about a problem we're dealing with right now, and frankly, it's bullshit. We're building a legal social network for adults, but getting access to the same banking and payment processing services available to mainstream technology companies has been an uphill battle.

Take Bluevine. We opened a business checking account, fully disclosed what Sxgram was, and were initially approved. Then, following an internal review, they closed our account. We had deposited just $20 to open it. We hadn't processed a single customer payment, had no chargebacks, and had no disputes. We were essentially rejected before we'd even had an opportunity to do business.

Then there's CCBill. Their review team proposed classifying Sxgram under Merchant Category Code 5967, associated with adult-oriented businesses. I've pushed back because we're not selling pornography, processing OnlyFans subscriptions, or taking commissions from creator earnings. We're selling access to software features on an adult social network. I've argued that MCC 5817, for digital applications, better reflects what our customers are actually purchasing. That classification hasn't been resolved, and ultimately the acquiring bank has a say in the decision.

Now, I understand why financial institutions have compliance requirements. We have age and identity verification, moderation, reporting systems, and policies governing what members can publish. But there's a difference between evaluating a company's actual risks and automatically treating it as high-risk because adults are allowed to discuss sex or publish lawful adult content.

And this isn't just Sxgram's problem. It's an issue facing businesses throughout the adult industry. Companies can operate legally, pay taxes, employ people, and follow the rules, yet still struggle to obtain ordinary banking and payment processing services. How are you supposed to build a sustainable business when the financial infrastructure everyone else relies on can be denied to you because of your industry?

We're absolutely open to working with financial institutions, industry organizations, attorneys, and advocates who can help address this. But I want Sxgram to do more than find a processor and move on. As we grow, I want us to dedicate funds toward industry advocacy and lobbying for fair banking and payment processing access. That means supporting efforts to ensure lawful businesses are evaluated on what they actually do, rather than being automatically excluded because of who their customers are.

And I'm not interested in building another successful adult platform that solves its own banking problems and leaves everyone else to fight the same battle. I want Sxgram to contribute to changing the conditions that created the problem in the first place.

Because, Lila, this goes right back to why I founded Sxgram. If you have the legal right to operate a business, you should have the right to market that business and fair access to the financial services necessary to operate it. That doesn't mean exemption from legitimate underwriting or compliance requirements. It means being judged by the same standards as everyone else.

We're not asking for special treatment. We're asking for equal treatment.

Lila: You've been remarkably candid about the banking challenges, Joseph. And your commitment to fighting for equal financial access raises an important point: you're not just building a business. You're asking people to trust you with a piece of theirs.

So here's the uncomfortable follow-up. If Sxgram never becomes profitable, what happens to everything creators have built there? Their content, followers, relationships, and business presence?

Joseph: Lila, you're really not letting me off easy, are you? But it's a fair question. If we're asking people to invest their time, creativity, and businesses into Sxgram, we have a responsibility to think about what happens if things don't work out.

First, I didn't build Sxgram with the intention of shutting it down. I'm building it to become a sustainable business, and that means generating enough revenue to support our infrastructure, our community, and the legal challenges that come with operating a social network for adults. But I'm not going to insult anyone's intelligence by pretending businesses can't fail.

But, I understand the concern. But I don't believe Sxgram's biggest financial challenge is that our business model is impossible. I think we simply haven't found the right banking and payment processing partners yet.

Think about it. OnlyFans, Fansly, Fanvue, and even Pornhub have found financial institutions and payment processors willing to work with them. Clearly, there are companies in the financial industry that have the stomach to support legal adult-oriented businesses. We just need to find the right partners who understand what we're actually building.

And let's be clear about something. Sxgram isn't Pornhub, OnlyFans, or Fanvue. We're not a pornography streaming service or a platform selling subscriptions to individual creators. Our closest comparison is Twitter/X or Instagram. We're a social network for adults, with publishing tools, business features, and opportunities for creators to connect with audiences.

The frustrating part is that financial institutions can see the word adult and immediately associate us with an entirely different business model. That's why I've been challenging the merchant classification proposed by CCBill. We should be evaluated based on the services we're actually selling, not simply the industry our members belong to.

Now, does that mean finding the right banking relationships will be easy? Obviously not. But I have faith that the partners we need are out there. Other adult-oriented companies have demonstrated that these relationships are possible, and I believe we can establish them too.

And I'm not building Sxgram around the assumption that we're going to fail. I'm building it around the belief that we can solve these problems, establish the right partnerships, and create a sustainable business.

Because, Lila, if financial institutions can support platforms like OnlyFans and Pornhub, I believe there's room for a financial partner willing to support a social network built specifically for adults.

---

Part Six: Safety, Consent, and the Cost of Being Adult-Friendly

Lila: Joseph, over the past five sections, we've explored why you created Sxgram, what fans and creators actually get from it, how your media ecosystem works, and the financial realities of building a social network for adults. You've been candid about everything from subscription revenue to banking discrimination and the possibility of lawsuits.

But there's another side to building an adult-friendly platform, and arguably, it's the most important.

Adult creators want freedom from arbitrary censorship. But freedom without accountability can become an invitation for harassment, impersonation, stolen content, and exploitation. Where do you draw the line between being adult-friendly and keeping people safe?

Joseph: Lila, being adult-friendly doesn't mean being a free-for-all. We're building a place where adults can express themselves, discuss sexuality, and promote legal businesses without being treated like criminals. But freedom of expression doesn't give anyone permission to harass, impersonate, exploit, or violate someone else's consent.

That's why we require age and identity verification before members can publish content. But we also recognize that verification alone doesn't tell you whether someone is trustworthy. 

That's why we've introduced something I think is particularly important: our Trust Score program. Think of it like Uber's rating system, but for social media. Members can evaluate an account based on its photo content, video content, communication, responsiveness, and authenticity. Those ratings contribute to a public Trust Score, giving other members additional information about the people they're considering following, engaging with, or doing business with.

We also have an About This Account feature that displays information such as when an account joined, its listed country, and its Trust Score. Members can open a more detailed Trust Report to see the individual ratings and leave feedback. We're giving the community more information to make its own decisions instead of asking everyone to blindly trust a blue checkmark.

Now, a Trust Score isn't proof that someone is safe, and popularity shouldn't determine whether someone is allowed to participate. We still need platform policies, reporting tools, and moderation to address harassment, stolen content, impersonation, and violations of consent. Community feedback should help people make informed decisions, not replace our responsibility to enforce the rules.

And I'm not going to pretend we've solved every safety challenge. As Sxgram grows, we'll have to keep improving how we identify abuse, handle disputes, and protect members from people who misuse the platform.

But here's where I draw the line, Lila. Being adult-friendly means respecting adults' right to express themselves. It doesn't mean giving bad actors permission to victimize them.

Freedom, consent, and accountability aren't competing ideas. They're what a responsible adult community should be built around.

Lila: I like the idea of bringing Uber-style accountability to social media. Your Trust Score gives members a way to evaluate authenticity, communication, and their experiences with other accounts. But ratings are one thing. What happens when someone is actually harmed?

What happens when somebody uploads content featuring another person who hasn't consented to its distribution? How do you handle allegations of impersonation, nonconsensual intimate imagery, copyright infringement, and abusive behavior? More importantly, what does the reporting and appeals process actually look like from the perspective of someone who has been harmed?

Joseph: Lila, consent isn't optional, and verification isn't a license to violate someone else's rights.

If someone reports stolen content, impersonation, harassment, or nonconsensual imagery, we have a responsibility to take that allegation seriously. That means reviewing the content, protecting the person reporting it, and taking appropriate action, including removal or account suspension when warranted.

But here's something I think the industry gets wrong: the burden shouldn't fall entirely on the victim to fight for their own protection.

Reporting needs to be accessible, decisions need to be communicated, and people need a meaningful opportunity to appeal. We also have to recognize that false accusations happen, so protecting victims and providing due process aren't mutually exclusive.

I'm not going to claim our systems are perfect or that every part of that process is fully developed. We're still building and improving them.

But my philosophy is simple: If we're going to build a platform that profits from people sharing their identities, creativity, and businesses, then we have an obligation to protect those people, too.

Freedom of expression matters. So does the freedom not to be exploited.

Lila: That's an important distinction, Joseph. Protecting people shouldn't be an afterthought, especially on a platform built around personal identity and intimate content. But technology is making identity itself increasingly complicated.

AI-generated personalities and synthetic content create another complicated problem. If a fan believes they're interacting with a real person but is actually communicating with an AI character or an automated account, what disclosures do you require? How do you protect both creators and fans from deception without prohibiting legitimate uses of AI?

Joseph: Lila, I don't have a problem with artificial intelligence. I have a problem with artificial deception. AI is an incredible creative tool, and I believe creators should have the freedom to use it to build businesses, develop personalities, and produce content. But I also believe fans deserve to know who, or what, they're interacting with. There's a fundamental difference between creating an AI personality and deliberately misleading someone into believing that personality is a real person.

That's actually one of the reasons we introduced our Uber-like Trust Score program. Rather than asking members to blindly trust a verification badge, we're giving the community the ability to evaluate accounts based on their actual experiences. Members can rate one another across five categories: photo content, video content, communication, responsiveness, and authenticity. Those ratings contribute to a public Trust Score, giving other members additional insight into the people and personalities they're considering engaging with.

We've also introduced an About This Account feature that displays information such as when an account joined, its listed country, and its overall Trust Score. Members can access a more detailed Trust Report, review individual ratings, and leave feedback about their experiences. Now, does that automatically identify an AI-generated personality? Of course not. We still need clear disclosures and policies addressing impersonation, misrepresentation, and deceptive behavior. But it does introduce another layer of transparency that helps members make more informed decisions.

And here's where my philosophy comes into play, Lila. I don't believe the platform should make every judgment for its users. I believe we should give adults the information and tools to make better judgments for themselves. AI-generated creators should have opportunities to build legitimate businesses, just like human creators. But neither should be allowed to deliberately misrepresent themselves to exploit their audiences.

At the end of the day, the issue isn't whether someone is real or AI-generated. It's whether they're being honest about who they are. I think that's a much more productive conversation than simply deciding whether AI belongs in the creator economy.

Lila: That's an interesting approach, Joseph. Rather than asking users to trust the platform, you're giving them tools to evaluate one another. But transparency is a two-way street, and in the adult creator economy, there's another side to that conversation that deserves attention.

Joseph: Lila, I think we need to distinguish between verifying someone's identity and exposing someone's identity. Those are two very different things. We require age and identity verification because we have a responsibility to protect our community, but that doesn't mean someone's legal identity needs to become their public identity. A creator should be able to build a business around a stage name or professional persona without unnecessarily exposing their personal life.

Now, like any social platform, Sxgram needs certain information to operate, maintain accounts, verify eligibility, and provide its services. But I believe we should be transparent about what we collect, why we collect it, who can access it, and how long we retain it. Verification information should be handled differently from public profile information, and users deserve meaningful control over what they choose to share.

As for leaving the platform, I don't believe joining a social network should mean surrendering ownership of your identity or creative work. Users should have a clear way to delete their accounts and understand what happens to their content and personal information afterward. We also have to be realistic about the limitations. Once something has been publicly shared, no platform can guarantee that screenshots, downloads, or third-party copies disappear.

And I won't pretend every privacy and data portability capability is fully developed. Those are responsibilities we need to continue addressing as Sxgram grows.

But here's my position, Lila: A platform should earn the right to keep its users by providing value, not by making it difficult for them to leave.

---

Part Seven: The Questions I Would Ask on Behalf of Creators

Lila: Joseph, over the last six sections, we've explored some of the more difficult questions surrounding Sxgram, from freedom of expression and community accountability to artificial intelligence, authenticity, and privacy. But I want to shift our conversation toward something equally important: opportunity. Because protecting creators is one thing. Helping them build something bigger is another.

Something I've become increasingly interested in is whether adult creators can build careers that eventually extend beyond adult content. Many are talented marketers, producers, writers, performers, entrepreneurs, and community builders, yet mainstream brands often reduce them to the category that first made them visible. How does Sxgram help someone move beyond that label rather than reinforcing it?

Joseph: Lila, have you watched Apple's Margo's Got Money Troubles? Because I think that series illustrates something our industry, myself included, often gets wrong. We make assumptions about people based on what they do, rather than taking the time to understand who they are.

Margo wasn't necessarily setting out to become a content creator, an entrepreneur, or a marketing expert. She was a young woman who had a baby, bills to pay, and very few options. She had money trouble. But suddenly, everyone had a label for her. OnlyFans called her a content creator. Agencies might call her a model. The government could classify her as a business. The media might call her a pornographer, while financial institutions could consider her high-risk. And social media platforms might decide her content violates their community standards.

But Margo just had money trouble.

And that's what I think people miss, Lila. We spend so much time defining people by how they earn money that we forget they're human beings with lives, circumstances, interests, and aspirations that have nothing to do with their content. Not everyone who joins OnlyFans wants to become an entrepreneur. Not everyone who creates adult content wants to make it their career. And not everyone wants to be defined by a decision they made during a particular chapter of their life.

That's where I want Sxgram to be different. We're building tools that allow people to share their stories, discover opportunities, develop relationships, and explore whatever interests them. If someone wants to become a successful adult creator, great. If they want to start a business, pursue another career, or simply connect with other adults without being judged, that's great too.

I don't believe it's Sxgram's job to tell people who they are, what they should become, or how they should define success.

Our job is to give them a platform where they have the freedom to figure that out for themselves.

Because sometimes, Lila, Margo isn't an entrepreneur waiting to be discovered. Sometimes, Margo just has money trouble.

Lila: I think that's an important distinction, Joseph. We've become so accustomed to categorizing people by what they do that we sometimes forget they have identities beyond their work. But let's consider someone who has embraced the creator economy and is already successful. What does Sxgram offer her?

Imagine another creator who is doing exceptionally well on OnlyFans and doesn't want another subscription platform, another dashboard, or another place to manage messages. She wants business opportunities, credibility, and a professional identity that can survive beyond her current audience. What is the strongest reason for her to participate in Sxgram, and what would you tell her not to expect?

Joseph: Lila, the first thing I'd tell her is don't leave OnlyFans. If she's built a successful business there, why would I encourage her to abandon something that's already working? From a business strategy perspective, that would make absolutely no sense. OnlyFans is generating revenue for her, and she's already invested time, energy, and resources into building that audience. My question wouldn't be how do we get her to move to Sxgram. My question would be, what opportunities is she missing because her entire business is concentrated on one platform?

Think about it this way. If she's generating six or seven figures annually through subscriptions, that's fantastic. But revenue and enterprise value aren't necessarily the same thing. She might have an incredibly profitable business today, but how much of that business depends on a platform she doesn't own, policies she doesn't control, and an audience she may not be able to reach independently? That's not a criticism of OnlyFans. That's a fundamental business risk associated with building any company around a single distribution or revenue channel.

As a business strategist, I'd want to understand what she's actually trying to accomplish. Does she want to launch a product line? Become a brand ambassador? Get into podcasting? Build a production company? Invest in other businesses? Maybe she wants to do absolutely none of those things and simply wants to continue earning money while creating more financial security for herself. The strategy should follow her ambitions, not somebody else's definition of what success should look like.

And that's where I see Sxgram fitting into the equation. We're not building another subscription platform that competes for her existing revenue. We're building an ecosystem that can help connect her existing business to additional opportunities. Through SxM Magazine, she can tell her story and establish a public narrative beyond her subscription content. Through SxRADIO, she can participate in conversations that demonstrate her interests, experience, and perspective. Through SxLINKS and our social features, she can connect audiences to the different businesses, projects, and platforms she's involved with.

But there's another business principle at work here, Lila, and I think it's incredibly important. Your existing customers aren't necessarily your future customers. Someone who's willing to pay for her adult content might not be interested in buying her skincare line, listening to her podcast, or hiring her as a creative director. Those opportunities may require entirely different audiences, relationships, and distribution channels. Simply having a million followers doesn't guarantee that any of those followers will become customers of her next business.

That's why I believe discoverability matters so much. We want Sxgram to create opportunities for people to be discovered through their ideas, expertise, interviews, conversations, and professional interests, not exclusively through the content that originally made them popular. A magazine interview, for example, can introduce someone to an audience that might never have discovered them through a subscription platform. That doesn't guarantee a business opportunity, but it creates another potential point of connection.

Now, here's what I wouldn't promise her. I wouldn't promise instant followers, guaranteed revenue, brand deals, or overnight credibility. Those things depend on market demand, positioning, relationships, execution, and a hundred other factors that no social network can control. And I certainly wouldn't tell her that joining Sxgram automatically makes her a businesswoman, entrepreneur, or industry expert. That's precisely the kind of labeling we were discussing earlier.

What I would tell her is that a successful business should create options, not just income. The more dependent she becomes on a single platform, audience, or revenue stream, the fewer options she may have if circumstances change. But if she can develop relationships, establish a recognizable professional identity, and explore opportunities outside her existing customer base, she's potentially building something that can outlast any individual platform.

And here's the part I think people sometimes misunderstand about Sxgram. I don't need her to stop being successful on OnlyFans for Sxgram to become valuable to her. In fact, I'd rather see her become even more successful there while discovering opportunities she wouldn't otherwise have considered.

Because ultimately, Lila, OnlyFans might be where she earns her living today. My goal with Sxgram is to help ensure that where she earns her living tomorrow remains her decision.

Lila: That's an interesting business distinction, Joseph. You're not asking creators to abandon what's working. You're encouraging them to think about diversification, long-term opportunities, and reducing their dependence on any single platform. But Sxgram isn't just for creators. There's another side of this ecosystem we haven't discussed enough: the fans.

Now imagine a fan who is curious about the platform but concerned that joining an adult-oriented network might expose their identity or subject them to unwanted attention. What should that person understand about privacy, discovery, and participation before creating an account? What can you guarantee, and what can't you guarantee?

Joseph: Lila, joining an adult-friendly social network doesn't mean you're an adult content creator, consumer, or anything else society might label you. You're an adult. That's it. What interests you, who you follow, and how you participate should be entirely up to you.

We require age and identity verification because we're building a community for adults. But verifying someone's identity and exposing their identity are two very different things. Your legal identity shouldn't automatically become your public identity simply because you want to participate.

And let's remember, fans aren't just customers waiting to spend money. They're people with their own interests, opinions, and experiences. Maybe they want to follow a creator, discover a podcast, read an article, or simply participate in a conversation. You shouldn't have to spend money or create content to find value in a social network.

Now, I won't promise absolute anonymity or that publicly shared information can never be copied or discovered. No responsible platform should. What I can promise is that we're committed to giving members meaningful choices about how they participate and continuing to improve those protections.

Because at the end of the day, Lila, being an adult is a qualification for joining Sxgram. It isn't a label that defines who you are.

Lila: I appreciate that distinction, Joseph. You're making it clear that Sxgram isn't just about creators or monetization. It's about giving adults the freedom to participate on their own terms. But freedom of participation raises another question: what happens when someone invests in your platform and doesn't get the results they hoped for?

Finally, imagine a creator who joins Sxgram, pays for verification, participates consistently for six months, and doesn't gain meaningful exposure, relationships, or business opportunities. What responsibility, if any, does Sxgram have to that person? At what point does a platform need to acknowledge that its promise isn't delivering for a particular user?

Joseph: Lila, let me share a story with you. I was recently in Mexico City talking with a real estate agent who told me about a friend of his who makes videos of luxury mansions and has over 200,000 followers. He was convinced that if he just bought himself a nice camera and a gimbal, he could do the same thing. Two hundred thousand followers, fame, fortune, the whole package. And I thought to myself, if that's all it took, my mom would be a wealthy YouTuber by now.

The reality is, anything worth building takes work, persistence, and sometimes a little luck. But we've created this culture where people see someone else's success and assume there's some secret formula they can buy. Marketers are especially good at selling that dream. They'll tell you that if you follow their system, buy their course, or pay for their services, you too can achieve the results they're advertising. But what they often leave out is the years of work, experimentation, failures, relationships, and circumstances that contributed to those results.

And that's exactly how I look at Sxgram. We're not selling success. We're building tools that people can leverage in pursuit of it. We can give you a platform to publish content, tell your story through SxM Magazine, build relationships, promote your business, and reach new audiences. But owning a camera doesn't make you a successful filmmaker, and having a Sxgram account doesn't automatically make you a successful creator.

Now, does that mean Sxgram has no responsibility if someone spends six months on our platform without seeing results? Absolutely not. As a business strategist, I believe our responsibility is to make sure the tools we're providing are useful, accessible, and capable of creating real opportunities. If people aren't finding value, we need to understand why and improve what we're building. But we also have to be honest about the difference between what a platform can provide and what an individual has to accomplish.

At the end of the day, Lila, I can give you the camera, the gimbal, and the platform to share your videos. What I can't give you is 200,000 followers. That part takes work, and sometimes a little luck. But we're here to give you the tools to leverage every opportunity you create along the way.

---

Part eight: The Founder Behind the Platform

Lila: Joseph, over the past seve sections, we've explored everything from Sxgram's business model and creator economy to freedom of expression, trust, privacy, and the responsibilities that come with building a social network. You've made a compelling case for what you believe Sxgram should become. But there's one person we haven't really examined yet: you. Because behind every platform is a founder making decisions that affect the people who use it.

Joseph, you've built media businesses and spent years working in marketing, customer acquisition, and digital publishing. But social networks are different because you're not simply selling a service; you're creating an environment where other people's relationships, identities, and livelihoods may become intertwined with your company. What about your experience makes you qualified to take on that responsibility, and what have you had to learn that your previous businesses didn't prepare you for?

Joseph: Lila, I think there's a misconception that I'm simply a marketer who woke up one morning and decided to build a social network. The truth is, I've been studying, developing, and building customer-centric platforms for well over a decade. In 2014, I launched Dezignwall, a community-driven social platform built around helping people showcase their work and gain recognition. Later, I founded Join inCrowd, a global networking platform that grew to more than 1.7 million users. So, building platforms around people, participation, and relationships isn't exactly new territory for me.

My experience also extends well beyond social networking. I've helped companies scale revenue, developed a product category that grew to more than $50 million annually, secured over $4.4 million in funding, and advised founders on more than $80 million in capital raises. I've authored more than 26 books, advised dozens of startups, and served in leadership and advisory roles across multiple industries. More recently, I built Only Fans Insider Magazine into a digital publication that attracted over 40.3 million organic readers in less than a year, without spending money on advertising.

But here's what I think is important, Lila. Those accomplishments don't automatically qualify me to make decisions about other people's lives. They demonstrate that I understand how to build businesses, develop platforms, attract audiences, and create systems that encourage participation. And that's valuable experience. But running a social network, particularly one serving the adult creator economy, requires understanding responsibilities that extend far beyond marketing, technology, and revenue.

What I've had to learn is that when you build a platform around people, you're not just building a business. You're creating an environment where people place their trust in you. Their identities, reputations, relationships, and sometimes their livelihoods can become connected to decisions you make. A feature that looks brilliant from a product-development perspective might introduce an entirely different challenge when you consider privacy, consent, safety, or unintended consequences.

And that's probably the biggest lesson. I've spent much of my career teaching businesses to put their customers at the center of their marketing strategies. I even wrote a book about it, Building Customer-Centric Brands: The Art of Elevating Customers by Sharing Their Story. But with Sxgram, customer-centricity isn't simply a marketing philosophy. It has to influence how we build the technology, establish policies, and make decisions that affect our members.

So, what qualifies me? I'd say my experience gives me the ability to build the infrastructure, understand the business model, and recognize opportunities others might overlook. But I also recognize that I don't know everything, and building something of this nature requires listening to the people who actually use it.

At the end of the day, Lila, my résumé might explain why I believe I can build Sxgram. But it won't determine whether people trust me to run it. That part I still have to earn.

Lila: That's an important distinction, Joseph. Your experience demonstrates that you know how to build and scale businesses, but you're acknowledging that trust isn't something you can manufacture through technology or marketing. It has to be earned. And that brings me to something I've been curious about regarding your leadership.

I also wonder how much of Sxgram reflects your own philosophy about community and how much reflects what creators have actually asked for. Founders can become so convinced that they understand a problem that they start building the solution they personally find exciting. Who has the authority to tell you that your vision is wrong, and when was the last time you listened?

Joseph: Lila, that's a fair question, and I actually have a very personal answer. I have a real estate magazine that's run by Isabella DeLucia. This past summer, after one of our calls, Isabella told me something that hit pretty hard. She said that I don't listen, and that when other people are talking, it looks like I'm just waiting for my turn to speak.

That feedback has been living rent-free in my head ever since.

And you know what? I'm glad she told me. Because whether or not that was my intention, that's how I made her feel. And if someone who's working alongside me feels that way, then I need to pay attention to it. I can have all the experience in the world, but none of that matters if the people around me don't feel heard.

I'm 48 years old, Lila, and I've come to two realizations that have fundamentally changed how I look at life. The first is that I'm not nearly as important as I once thought I was. The second is that the older I get, the more I realize how little I actually understand about the world.

And I think that's an important perspective to have when you're building something like Sxgram. I have ideas, experience, and a vision for what this platform could become. But that doesn't mean I understand everyone's experiences, challenges, or motivations. Just because I can identify a problem doesn't mean I automatically understand what the solution should look like for someone else.

So, who has the authority to tell me I'm wrong? Isabella does. Our creators do. Our members do. Anyone willing to challenge my assumptions and help me see something I might have missed.

Because at this point in my life, Lila, I'm far more interested in getting it right than being right.

Lila: That's probably one of the more revealing answers you've given me, Joseph. It's one thing to say you're open to criticism. It's another to admit that someone close to your business told you that you weren't listening. And perhaps recognizing how much you don't know is especially important when you're building in an industry as complicated as this one.

You've chosen to build in an industry that faces unusually intense scrutiny from banks, technology providers, advertisers, regulators, and the general public. What has been the hardest part of building Sxgram that you didn't anticipate? Is there anything about the adult creator economy that you understand differently now than when you started?

If Sxgram becomes commercially successful, you stand to benefit financially from that success. I don't think there's anything inherently wrong with that, but I do think readers deserve clarity about the relationship between your personal interests and the community's interests. What commitments are you willing to make today that would remain in place even if breaking them could make your company more profitable?

Joseph: Lila, I think the biggest surprise has been discovering just how many obstacles exist between having a legitimate business idea and being allowed to operate that business. I've worked across numerous industries, built technology platforms, raised capital, and helped companies grow. But in the adult creator economy, you can build a perfectly legitimate business and still find yourself fighting for access to the basic services other industries take for granted.

And what's interesting is that these challenges don't necessarily come from the customers. They come from the infrastructure surrounding the industry. Banking, payment processing, advertising, technology providers, and distribution channels can all introduce restrictions that have very little to do with whether your actual business provides value. You're not just competing for customers. You're navigating an entire ecosystem that may not want to do business with you.

But I think the bigger thing I've learned is that there really isn't one adult creator economy. There are people building sophisticated businesses, people supplementing their incomes, people exploring their identities, and people simply trying to pay their bills. We've discussed this with Margo's Got Money Troubles. The industry wants to categorize everyone, but the people participating in it don't necessarily see themselves through those same labels.

And perhaps that's been the most important realization. I originally approached Sxgram as a business strategist looking at an underserved market and asking what infrastructure was missing. But the longer I've worked in this space, the more I've realized that the problem isn't simply a lack of technology. It's a lack of understanding of the people we're building that technology for.

And that brings me back to something Isabella taught me. I can spend all day identifying problems and building solutions. But if I'm not listening to the people experiencing those problems, I might be solving something they never asked me to solve.

So the hardest part, Lila, hasn't necessarily been building Sxgram. It's been learning that understanding an industry and understanding the people within it are two very different things.

Lila: That's an important realization, Joseph. You've spent your career identifying problems and building solutions, but it sounds like this industry has challenged you to question whether you're solving the right problems in the first place. And perhaps that's the real test of Sxgram: not what you're capable of building, but whether people's lives are actually better because you built it.

And finally, suppose we're sitting down for another interview three years from now. I don't want to hear about how many features you've launched or how impressive the platform looks. What would have to be different in the lives of actual creators and fans for you to say that building Sxgram was worth it?

Joseph: Lila, you know what bothers me about this question? We've created this culture where the people who build the platforms become bigger celebrities than the people who actually make those platforms valuable.

Now, I'm not suggesting Hollywood has everything figured out. Lord knows that industry has some shady shit going on. But look at the Oscars, the Emmys, the Tonys, or the CMA Awards. At least there's a tradition of putting the spotlight on the actors, musicians, writers, directors, and performers who make the industry what it is. The people creating the work are the ones being celebrated.

Then look at technology. Good Lord. Tech founders run around like they're modern-day oracles, delivering these grand philosophical proclamations about humanity and the future. If I have to listen to one more pontification from Sam Altman or Elon Musk about how the rest of us should understand the world, I might lose my mind.

And you know what? The adult creator economy isn't much better.

Look at the attention given to executives like Keily Blair, Ami Gan, Tim Stokely, or the founders of Fanvue. The industry conversation so often revolves around their platforms, their valuations, their innovations, and their predictions about the future. You see executives celebrated at technology conferences and business summits, talking about an industry whose value is created by people working in an entirely different reality.

But here's my question, Lila. Where are these leaders when the cameras aren't pointed at them?

Where are they in the strip clubs? Where are they talking to the people working in brothels? Where are they listening to street-based sex workers? Where are the local creator chapters, the grassroots gatherings, and the opportunities for people in this industry to actually sit across the table from the executives whose decisions affect their livelihoods?

I'm not claiming none of these executives ever engage with creators. But I am questioning why the industry's most visible conversations so often seem to happen in boardrooms and conference halls rather than in the communities doing the work.

Because from where I'm sitting, there's an enormous difference between building a business that makes money from an industry and building a business that actually serves the people in that industry.

And that brings me to your question about what success looks like three years from now.

I have two very specific outcomes in mind.

First, I want the person who doesn't have to be in the adult industry to have every opportunity to stay in it, if they want to. Maybe they're financially successful. Maybe they love what they do. Maybe they're building a brand, a business, or an entire career around adult entertainment. That's their choice. I want Sxgram to give them more ways to grow, more opportunities to connect, and more control over what they build.

Second, I want the person who entered the adult industry because they needed money to have the opportunity to leave it if that's what they want. Maybe they started creating content because they couldn't pay their rent. Maybe they had children to support. Maybe they simply didn't see another way to make ends meet. I want them to be able to earn money today while discovering relationships, skills, opportunities, and pathways that could help them build a different future tomorrow.

And I want to be very clear about something. One of those outcomes isn't better than the other.

I'm not suggesting that leaving adult entertainment is some kind of moral achievement, or that staying in it means someone has failed to reach their potential. That's exactly the kind of judgment I want to get away from.

The person who loves this industry should have the freedom to build a life within it. The person who entered it out of necessity should have the freedom to build a life beyond it.

Neither person should have to ask permission to pursue the life they want.

Now, will Sxgram accomplish that for everyone? Of course not. I'm not going to sit here and pretend that launching a social network magically solves poverty, discrimination, or the challenges people face in this industry. And three years from now, I don't want to be pointing at our features and claiming we've changed lives without having the evidence to support it.

I want to hear from actual people. I want to know what opportunities they found, what businesses they built, what relationships they developed, and whether they have more choices than they did before joining Sxgram.

Because, Lila, I don't measure success by how many people we convince to stay on our platform. I measure it by how many people have more freedom because our platform exists.

And if, three years from now, we have real evidence that Sxgram helped people accomplish those two things—build the life they want within the adult industry or build the life they want beyond it—then I'll consider what we've built a success.

The goal isn't to keep people in the adult industry. The goal isn't to get people out of it. The goal is to make sure that staying or leaving is genuinely their choice.

That's the difference I want Sxgram to make.

And frankly, Lila, I'd much rather spend the next three years helping people create those opportunities than standing on a stage somewhere telling everyone how brilliant I am for building another fucking social network.

---

Lila's closing question

Lila: Joseph, that's probably the clearest you've been about what success means to you. You're not trying to convince people to enter or leave the adult industry. You're trying to give them the freedom to decide for themselves. And I appreciate that you're willing to be judged by actual outcomes rather than promises. But there's one final question I think every creator and fan deserves to hear you answer.

Joseph, you've told me what you want Sxgram to become, and I understand why that vision might appeal to people who feel underserved by existing platforms. But creators have heard ambitious promises before, and fans have more entertainment choices than they can possibly consume. So I want to finish with a question that strips away the technology, the branding, the magazine, and the business model.

If Sxgram disappeared tomorrow, what would creators and fans genuinely lose that they couldn't already find somewhere else?

Joseph: Lila, if Sxgram disappeared tomorrow, I don't think the world would stop turning. Creators would still have OnlyFans, Fansly, Instagram, X, and dozens of other platforms. Fans would still have more content than they could possibly consume in a lifetime. And frankly, if all Sxgram ever becomes is another place to post pictures, share videos, and collect followers, then we haven't built anything the world actually needs.

But here's what I think they'd lose. They'd lose another attempt to build something around the people participating in the industry rather than simply the content they're producing or consuming.

Because when I look at the adult creator economy, I see an industry that's extraordinarily good at monetizing people's attention but not nearly as good at expanding their opportunities.

A creator can have thousands of subscribers and still struggle to build a professional network. A fan can spend hundreds of dollars supporting someone and still be treated as little more than a transaction. And someone who entered the industry because they needed money can find themselves increasingly defined by the very thing they originally saw as a temporary solution.

I don't believe people should have to become more valuable to a platform before they become more valuable to themselves.

That's what I'm trying to challenge.

Now, can people find community elsewhere? Absolutely. Can they build businesses elsewhere? Of course. Can they discover opportunities without Sxgram? Every single day. I'm not arrogant enough to believe we invented community, entrepreneurship, or human connection.

But I do believe there's room for a platform that deliberately brings those things together for adults who have too often been reduced to labels, categories, and transactions.

And I think that's the distinction, Lila. I'm not trying to build a place people can't leave. I'm trying to build a place that gives people more places they can go.

If Sxgram disappeared tomorrow, we'd lose that particular effort. But I wouldn't expect creators or fans to mourn a vision they haven't yet benefited from. That's something we have to earn through what actually happens in their lives.

And if you ask me this same question three years from now, I hope I can give you names, stories, and measurable outcomes instead of another explanation of what I believe.

Because the ultimate test isn't whether people would miss Sxgram.

It's whether they'd miss the opportunities they found because Sxgram existed.

And until we can demonstrate that difference, Lila, we're still just another social network making promises.

---

The Difference Between Building a Platform and Making a Difference

By Lila Monroe

I've interviewed enough entrepreneurs to recognize a compelling pitch when I hear one. Founders are exceptionally good at describing the future they're going to create. They talk about disruption, innovation, underserved markets, and changing the world. Joseph Haecker certainly knows how to do that. But after this conversation, I found myself less interested in his vision for Sxgram and more interested in whether he's prepared to let the people using it challenge that vision.

There's no question that Joseph brings considerable experience to the table. He's built businesses, developed social platforms, attracted audiences, and spent years studying how people participate in communities. But experience doesn't automatically translate into understanding, particularly in an industry where privacy, reputation, financial independence, and personal safety can be deeply intertwined.

What struck me most wasn't his résumé or the technology behind Sxgram. It was his admission that Isabella DeLucia, who runs one of his digital magazines, told him he doesn't listen—that he sometimes appears to be waiting for his turn to speak. He didn't offer an excuse. He said the criticism has lived rent-free in his head ever since.

That's an unusually revealing admission from someone whose business depends on convincing people that he understands their needs.

Of course, recognizing a personal shortcoming and correcting it are two different things. The same is true of building a customer-centric business. Haecker speaks passionately about listening to creators, but the real test will be whether their experiences influence Sxgram's decisions when doing so becomes inconvenient, expensive, or contrary to his original vision.

I also found his criticism of industry leadership worth examining. He's frustrated by a culture that celebrates technology founders and platform executives while the people generating the actual value often receive considerably less attention. His comparison to Hollywood's awards culture isn't perfect, and neither is Hollywood. But the underlying question is legitimate: Why do we spend so much time celebrating the people who own the platforms and comparatively little time celebrating the people whose work makes those platforms successful?

It's a criticism that he will eventually have to apply to himself. If Sxgram grows, will he remain accessible to the people using it? Will creators have meaningful influence, or simply opportunities to provide feedback? Will the platform celebrate its community, or will its founder become another executive delivering speeches about empowering people he rarely encounters?

Those questions remain unanswered.

But perhaps the most interesting part of our conversation was his definition of success. He doesn't believe Sxgram should exist to keep people in the adult entertainment industry, nor does he believe its purpose should be to help everyone escape it. Instead, he wants to create opportunities for both.

For the creator who genuinely enjoys their work, success might mean building a larger business, developing professional relationships, and pursuing a long-term career without being pressured to become someone else. For the person who entered the industry out of financial necessity, success might mean earning enough money to stabilize their life while discovering opportunities that eventually allow them to pursue something different.

Two completely different outcomes, united by one principle: people should have the freedom to choose their own future.

That's a more interesting ambition than building another social network. It's also considerably harder to measure and deliver.

Sxgram's combination of social networking, digital publishing, audio programming, and creator tools offers a possible approach. But none of those features is inherently revolutionary. Creators already have places to publish content, promote themselves, build audiences, and earn money. The existence of another platform doesn't automatically improve their circumstances.

What matters is whether bringing these opportunities together produces something meaningfully different. Do creators develop relationships that lead to new opportunities? Do fans become valued participants rather than simply customers? Do members gain more control over their professional identities and future choices? And can Sxgram demonstrate those outcomes rather than merely suggest they're possible?

I appreciated that he didn't pretend to have those answers today.

I also wouldn't mistake that humility for proof that Sxgram will succeed. Good intentions don't guarantee good products. An admirable philosophy doesn't eliminate operational challenges. And a founder's willingness to acknowledge criticism doesn't necessarily mean the business has developed the accountability needed to act on it.

The adult creator economy has heard plenty of promises. What it needs now is evidence.

That brings me back to my final question: What would creators and fans genuinely lose if Sxgram disappeared tomorrow?

Joseph's answer was revealing because he didn't claim the platform was already indispensable. He acknowledged that people have alternatives and that Sxgram still has to earn its place in their lives.

For me, that may be the most important distinction in this entire interview.

Sxgram doesn't deserve to succeed simply because the industry needs better options. It deserves to succeed only if it becomes one.

Three years from now, I won't be particularly interested in how many features Sxgram has launched, how many people have registered, or how often Joseph is invited to speak about the future of the creator economy.

I'll want to hear from the creators who stayed in the industry because they wanted to, the people who left because they finally had another option, and the fans who found something more meaningful than another subscription.

I'll want to know whether those outcomes actually happened, and what role Sxgram played in making them possible.

And I'll want to ask Isabella DeLucia one more question.

Has Joseph learned to listen?

Because after spending this much time discussing his philosophy, his ambitions, and his vision for the future, I suspect the answer to that question may tell us more about Sxgram's potential than anything its founder could say.

— Lila Monroe, staff writer for Only Fans Insider Magazine.