Fan Engagement Models in Korean Entertainment Platforms

**Originally written for the course Understanding Digital Media at Yonsei University

Introduction

In the summer of 2023, HYBE Corporation, the home to global superstars BTS, reported that its fan platform Weverse had surpassed 9.7 million monthly active users, generating over $1.3 billion in annual merchandise sales alone (“Kakao’s New Fandom Platform”).  Meanwhile, rival SM Entertainment’s Bubble app, a pay-to-chat service that connects fans directly to idols like aespa and NCT, amassed 1.8 million paid subscribers paying $3 a month for the illusion of personal connection (“Bubble, Fan Engagement”).  These staggering figures depict a seismic shift in the K-pop industry as the fandom transforms from passive consumption to a hyper-monetized digital economy where parasocial relationships are created, packaged, and sold with the click of a button. 

This paper examines how leading Korean entertainment companies, HYBE and SM Entertainment, leverage platforms like Weverse and Bubble to streamline fan engagement.  While both platforms capitalize on fans’ emotional investment, their contrasting designs —Weverse as a communal space and Bubble as an intimate, paywalled space —reflect differing views on the future of fan platform relationships.  Through this analysis, the critical tensions of the ethical implications of converting fan labor, data, and emotional vulnerability into corporate profit will be explored. 

The rise of K-pop as a global cultural force has been tied to technological innovation since its inception, from viral music videos on YouTube to hashtag-driven Twitter campaigns (“Intellectual Property”).  However, the emergence of dedicated fan platforms marks a new era of controlled systems where companies curate and monetize every facet of fan interaction.  Where fans once purchased albums or concert tickets, they now subscribe to idol messaging services, unlock exclusive content, and surrender data that fuels targeted merch drops (“Intellectual Property”).  These platforms thrive on parasocial relationships, one-sided emotional connections between fans and idols, which HYBE and SM cultivate through features like Bubble’s AI-translated “personal” messages or Weverse’s real-time livestreams (“Parasocial Relationships”). 

This commodification continues to raise urgent questions, though.  As Kakao Entertainment’s CEO recently warned, “When fan devotion becomes a revenue stream, the line between community and exploitation blurs” (“Kakao’s New Fandom Platform”).  This paper examines that line, comparing Weverse’s scalable, data-driven model with Bubble’s niche exclusivity to reveal how platform design shapes and potentially exploits fan behavior.  Through an analysis of subscription structures, content strategies, and fan discourse, it argues that while both platforms succeed in the monetization of parasocial relationships, their approaches reflect larger industry debates regarding privacy, accessibility, and the ethics of emotional labor in digital capitalism. 

The following sections will dissect these dynamics through a literature review of parasocial theory and platform economies, followed by a comparative analysis of Weverse and Bubble’s business models.  The conclusion of this paper will assess what these case studies suggest about the sustainability of fan-driven platforms and the evolving role of data in cultural production. 

Literature Review

Parasocial Relationships as Engineered Intimacy

Parasocial Relationships form the foundation for K-pop’s commercial success.  Jung and Shim (2020) argue that platforms like Weverse and Bubble institutionalize parasocial relationships by simulating intimacy through features like direct messages and behind-the-scenes content, which fans perceive as exclusive access to idols’ lives (“Intellectual Property”).  For example, Bubble’s paywalled messages, framed as personal interactions between idols and fans, exploit fans’ desires for closeness, creating a loyalty that translates to recurring monthly subscriptions (“Bubble, Fan Engagement”).  In a similar manner, Weverse’s community feeds and livestreams create a digital fan club atmosphere where algorithmic curation amplifies content that promotes emotional investment (Lee). 

Critics note that these platforms blur the lines between authentic connection and corporate strategy.  As Lee (2023) observes, the illusion of reciprocity, like idols’ “liking” fan posts on Weverse, encourages compulsive engagement, normalizing surveillance and data extraction in exchange for perceived intimacy (“Parasocial Relationships”).  This dynamic reflects broader trends in social media, where platforms profit from users’ emotional investments while masking exploitative practices (Udovičić). 

Monetizing Fan Labor

Weverse and Bubble exemplify two different monetization strategies rooted in platform design.  HYBE’s Weverse operates as a “super-app,” integrating free community interaction with paid tiers for merchandise, concert livestreams, and early ticket access.  This model prioritizes scale, leveraging HYBE’s global artist roster to attract 9.7 million monthly active users (“Technology-Enabled Entertainment”).  Contrarily, SM’s Bubble adopts a more niche approach, charging fans $2-$3 on a monthly basis per artist for personalized messages, creating a premium experience that generated $40 million in 2023 (“Bubble, Fan Engagement”). 

Both of these platforms capitalize on superfan economies, where a minority of highly engaged users drive revenues.  While specific data for Weverse is not publicly available, industry reports commonly note that a minority of highly engaged users, often known as “superfans,” account for a disproportionate share of platform revenue through purchases of limited-edition merchandise and exclusive content (“Weverse Leads”; “Weverse Hits 150M Downloads”).    This pattern is consistent with Weverse’s focus on monetization of fan loyalty and leveraging data-driven recommendations to boost profits.  Bubble, on the other hand, relies primarily on exclusivity, offering fans direct, but paywalled, access to personal communication with their favorite idols.  Its pay-per-artist structure incentivizes fans to subscribe to multiple artists, driving recurring revenue for the platform.  According to industry analysis, Bubble’s unique approach has helped DearU, the platform’s operator, achieve significant growth in paid subscribers and platform revenues, but specific ARPU increases linked to group discounts aren’t detailed in publicly available reports (“Bubble, Fan Engagement”). Instead, KED Global highlights that Bubble’s subscription base and revenue have increased rapidly since the platform’s launch, displaying the effectiveness of its monetization strategy in the competitive fan platform market.  These strategies carried out by the two corporations reflect an industry shift from album sales to platform-dependent revenue, where fan labor is commodified as free marketing (“Intellectual Property”). 

Ethical Tensions

The ethical implications of fan platforms have sparked heated debates about privacy and the ethical implications of commodification.  Weverse’s integration with HYBE Labels allows cross-platform data harvesting, using purchase history and engagement metrics to target fans with personalized advertisements (Lee).  While HYBE claims that this enhances user experience, critics argue that it exemplifies “surveillance capitalism,” where emotional vulnerability is monetized (Udovičić).  Bubble’s closed ecosystem, though much less data-intensive, normalizes pay-to-chat systems, with fans spending upwards of $100 a year to maintain perceived relationships with idols (“HYBE/SM Collaboration Thread”). 

Fan discourse reveals uncertainty, as on one hand, platforms democratize access to idols, especially for international fans who are excluded from many offline events, but on the other hand, communities like r/kpopcritic argue that paywalls exacerbate inequality, privileging wealthy fans and alienating causal supporters and those who have less means (“Technology-Enabled Entertainment”; “HYBE/SM Collaboration Thread”).  Furthermore, the lack of transparency regarding data usage highlighted in a 2024 petition against Weverse’s third-party tracking underscores regular gaps in protecting the privacy of fans (“Kakao’s New Fandom Platform”). 

Synthesis and Limitations

Existing research emphasizes how Weverse and Bubble redefine fan engagement through their means of platform intimacy, yet many gaps in research remain.  There are few studies that quantitatively analyze the long-term psychological effects of parasocial commodification, most notably on adolescents.  Additionally, while HYBE and SM are often the frequent focuses and comparisons in these conversations, emerging competitors like Kakao’s Berries, which claims to prioritize data anonymity, warrant research as possible ethical alternatives. 

This review highlights the necessity of an interdisciplinary approach, like combining cultural studies, economics, and digital ethics, to evaluate fan engagement platforms.   As K-pop continues to grow bigger globally, analyzing these models is vital to balancing cultural connectivity and corporate exploitation. 

Research Methods

This study employs several methods to analyze and compare the digital fan engagement models of HYBE’s Weverse and SM Entertainment’s Bubble, focusing on platform design, monetization strategies, and how parasocial relationships are cultivated.  The methodology is structured around three primary research activities, which are platform feature analysis, comparative business model review, and qualitative discourse analysis of fan perception. 

Platform Feature Analysis

First, the core functions and user interfaces of Weverse and Bubble were examined.  This analysis focused on how each platform designs interactive features like community feeds, direct messaging, exclusive content, and gamification elements to foster engagement and simulate an engineered intimacy between fans and artists.  For example, Bubble's one-on-one chat interface, which has features like daily counters and event popups, is designed to mimic authentic relationships and encourage long-term retention of subscribers (“K-pop Private Messaging”).  Weverse, though, integrates community forums, livestreaming, and merchandise sales, creating a multi-faceted platform that supports a wide variety of fan activities (“Study on the Business Model”).

Comparative Business Model Review

Next, the business models of both Weverse and Bubble were compared using publicly available relevant financial data, company disclosures, revenue streams, and user growth.  For example, KED Global reports that Bubble achieved over 1.2 million paid subscriptions within a year of its launch, with monthly revenue exceeding 5.4 billion KRW, driven by its pay-per-artist model and lack of reliance on traditional business tactics (“Bubble, Fan Engagement”).  Weverse’s business model, as described by academic studies on the platform, emphasizes scale and ecosystem integration above all, leveraging partnerships and platform strategies to maximize user engagement and revenues (“Study on the Business Model”).  This comparative approach highlights the divergent strategies employed by each company to monetize parasocial relationships and sustain growth of the platforms. 

Qualitative Discourse Analysis

Finally, qualitative discourse analysis was conducted to assess how fans perceive and discuss the ethical and emotional implications of these platforms.  This involved collecting and analyzing user comments and discussions from social media platforms like Reddit and Twitter, as well as forums dedicated to K-pop.  Thematic coding was used to identify and sort recurring concerns related to privacy, data usage, and the commodification of fandoms, as well as the expression of satisfaction or criticisms of the platforms’ features and business practices.  This method aligns itself with recent academic studies that examine the labor process and relational labor within K-pop fan platforms, giving insight into the experiences of users (“Study on the Business Model”). 

Findings

Platform Design and User Engagement

Weverse and Bubble utilize distinct platform designs that shape how fans interact with artists and with each other.  Weverse operates as a so-called “super app,” integrating community forums, livestreaming, merchandise sales, and event management all into a single platform (Lee; “Study on the Business Models”; Weverse).  Its design encourages open collective engagement where fans can post messages, react to artist updates, and participate in live chats and events.  Recent updates, like the introduction of a community calendar and the ability to host or join listening parties, further enhance the sense of belonging and real-time participation that fans long for (Weverse).  Weverse’s model is scalable and community-driven, leveraging the large global followings of HYBE artists to create a vibrant, self-sustaining ecosystem of fans (Lee). 

Contrarily, Bubble is designed with the intent of creating perceived intimacy and exclusivity.  The platform’s core feature is one-on-one pay-to-chat messages with idols, where fans subscribe to individual artists for a monthly fee and receive “personal” messages from them (Lee; “Can Someone Plz Explain”).  These messages are not really one-on-one as they are curated to simulate direct communication and reinforce parasocial relationships.  Bubble’s interface is very streamlined and focused, with little to no emphasis on interactions between fans, positioning it as a premium service for dedicated fans who are willing to pay for perceived proximity with their idols (“Can Someone Plz Explain”). 

Monetization Strategies

Both platforms have developed innovative strategies in how to monetize fan engagement.  Weverse monetizes through multiple streams of revenue like merchandise sales via Weverse Shop, paid memberships for exclusive content, and live event ticketing (Lee, “HYBE/SM Collaboration Thread”).  The alleged introduction of new membership tiers later this year that offer ad-free and higher quality streaming as well as offline access to content reflects a strategy to deepen engagement and increase revenue from the most dedicated users (“HYBE/SM Collaboration Thread”; Weverse).  Weverse’s integration of e-commerce and community features into the platform exemplifies its identity as a “super app,” where fans can move seamlessly from social interaction to purchasing official goods (Lee).   

Bubble relies primarily on subscription revenue, with the $2-$3 monthly fee paid by fans for access to occasional message and photo updates (“Can Someone Plz Explain”).  This model has proven to be highly effective, with rapid growth in the number of paid subscribers and significant generation of revenues for SM Entertainment and DearU.  The pay-per-artist structure of the platform incentivizes fans to subscribe to multiple artists, further boosting revenues for the companies.  Unlike Weverse, though, Bubble does not offer a wide range of additional services and activities, instead focusing solely on the commodification of idol communication. 

Cultivation of Parasocial Relationships

Both platforms actively seek to cultivate parasocial relationships between fans and artists, but their methods differ.  Weverse uses community features, live streams, and interactive content to create a sense of belonging and collectiveness among the fandom, where fans feel as though they are a part of a larger group that is united by their shared devotion to a particular artist (Lee; “Study on the Business Model”).  This approach creates loyalty and emotional investment as fans participate in events and activities. 

Bubble emphasizes individualized intimacy with the artists.  The platform’s messaging system is designed to make fans feel as though they are on the receiving end of personal attention from their idols, even though messages are simultaneously sent to subscribers (Lee, “Can Someone Plz Explain”).  This simulation of one-on-one interaction is highly effective in deepening emotional attachment and encouraging long-term and numerous subscriptions. 

Discussion

Differing Strategies, Similar Challenges

Weverse and Bubble represent two different types of digital fan engagement.  One represents a communal, scalable experience, and the other is an intimate, exclusive experience.  Weverse’s “super app” model is well-suited to large global fandoms and offers a wide variety of services that can cater to any fan’s needs.  Its success lies in its ability to foster a sense of belonging and collective fandom identity, which drives increases in both engagement and revenue (Lee; “Study on the Business Model”).  This model, however, also faces challenges in terms of moderation. Privacy, and to commodification of fan labor. 

Bubble’s focus on exclusivity and inauthentic intimacy has proven to be highly effective at monetizing dedicated fans, but it risks alienating those was cannot afford one subscription, let alone multiple.  The platform’s success is built upon the emotional labor of both its artists and fans, as artists are expected to maintain regular communication with fans, and fans are encouraged to invest emotionally and financially in supporting these manufactured relationships (“Study on the Business Models”; “Can Someone Plz Explain”).  This dynamic raise important ethical questions about the boundaries between genuine connection and commercial exploitation. 

The Role of Algorithmic Curation and Data Monetization

Both platforms leverage user data to personalize content and increase engagement.  Weverse uses algorithmic curation to recommend artists, merchandise, and events to fans, creating a feedback loop that amplifies content and encourages repeat purchases (Lee).  This approach is central to the platform’s business model, but it raises concerns about privacy and the potential for manipulation. 

Bubble relies less on algorithmic curation and more on the perception of authenticity of direct communication with idols.  The platform, however, still collects and uses user data to optimize its services and target marketing efforts to its consumers.  The ethical implications of data collection and utilization are a recurring theme throughout the online fan discourse regarding the topic, with many fans expressing uncertainty and apprehension about the trade-off between personalization and online privacy (“Study on the Business Model”). 

Fan Discourse and Critiques

Fann communities exhibit both enthusiastic and critical outlooks on both of these platforms.  On forums like Reddit and Allkpop, fans praise the opportunities that they have for connection and exclusive offerings, but also voice their thoughts and concerns about the commercialization of these interactions, privacy, and the effects of parasocial relationships (“Can Someone Plz Explain”).    This critical outlook and uncertainty presented by fans reflects the growing discourse regarding the role that digital platforms play in shaping cultural consumption and the commodification of fandoms (Lee; “Study on the Business Model”). 

Implications and Conclusion

The success of Weverse and Bubble underscores the ever-growing importance of digital platforms in the global music industry.  Both models demonstrate the potential for innovative monetization strategies that can leverage fan loyalty and emotional investment.  They do, however, highlight the growing concern regarding the need for transparency, ethical considerations, and user protection incorporated in the design and operation of digital platforms (Lee; “Study on the Business Model”). 

Looking ahead, the industry is likely to see further and more daring experimentation with platform models that include elements from both Weverse and Bubble.  Platforms like Universe, which offer original content and AI-driven features, have already begun to explore new ways to engage with and commodify fans (“How K-pop Apps Work”).  As the market evolves, the challenge will be to balance commercial success with ethical responsibilities to ensure that fan engagement remains as authentic as possible, inclusive to all people, and respectful of user data privacy. 

Works Cited

Allkpop Forum. “Can Someone Plz Explain to Me What’s the Difference Between Weverse, Universe, and Bubble?” Allkpop Forum, 2023, forum.allkpop.com/thread/45011-can-someone-plz-explain-to-me-what-s-the-difference-between-wevers-univers-and-b/. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Asianews.network. “Technology-Enabled Entertainment: Lessons from the Korean Wave.” Asianews.network, n.d., asianews.network/technology-enabled-entertainment-lessons-from-the-korean-wave/. Accessed 15 June 2025.

FWLS. “Intellectual Property, Fan Engagement, Parasocial Relationships.” Fan Studies Journal, 2023, www.fwls.org/uploads/soft/250414/1-250414144940.pdf. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Jung, Eun-Young, and Shim, Doobo. “Duality of K-Content in the Era of Netflix: An Investigation of Korean ‘Netflix Original’ Characteristics.” International Journal of Communication, vol. 17, 2023, pp. 1932–8036/20230005, ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/download/20725/4399. Accessed 15 June 2025.

KED Global. “Bubble, Fan Engagement, Monetization, Business Model.” KED Global, 18 Oct. 2021, www.kedglobal.com/music-entertainment/newsView/ked202110180002. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Kim, Jiyoung. “Digital Fandom and the Commodification of Social Capital: A Case Study of K-pop Superfans.” Journal of Popular Culture, vol. 56, no. 2, 2023, pp. 345–365. ProQuest, www.proquest.com/docview/3187524831?accountid=15179&sourcetype=Scholarly%20Journals. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Korea Herald. “Kakao’s New Fandom Platform to Come Head-to-Head with Hybe’s Weverse.” The Korea Herald, 2024, www.koreaherald.com/article/10411755. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Lee, Minyoung. “Platform Fandom: Weverse and the Technological Domestication of Fan Community.” Sage Journals, 2025. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Mashable. “How K-pop Apps Work.” Mashable, 2024. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Music Business Worldwide. “Weverse Hits 150M Downloads, Sees 19% User Growth in 2024 as Ariana Grande, Dua Lipa Join Superfan Platform.” Music Business Worldwide, 2024, www.musicbusinessworldwide.com/weverse-hits-150m-downloads-sees-19-user-growth-in-2024-as-ariana-grande-dua-lipa-join-superfan-platform123/. Accessed 15 June 2025.

NNGroup. “K-pop Private Messaging: How Platforms Like Bubble and Universe Foster Intimacy with Fans.” NNGroup, 2023, www.nngroup.com/articles/kpop-private-messaging/. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Parasocial Relationships and How K-pop Companies Feed Into Them. Typelish, n.d., typelish.com/b/parasocial-relationships-and-how-kpop-companies-feed-into-them-111575. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Reddit. “HYBE/SM Collaboration Thread.” Reddit, 2023. Accessed 15 June 2025.

RouteNote. “Weverse Leads the Superfan Revolution in the Music Industry.” RouteNote Blog, 2024, routenote.com/blog/weverse-leads-the-superfan-revolution-in-the-music-industry/. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Study on the Business Model of a Fan Community Platform ‘Weverse.’ KoreaScience, 2021. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Udovičić, Katarina. “AI as a Gatekeeper for Culture: The Role of Netflix Algorithms in Shaping Cultural Exposure.” LinkedIn, September 13, 2024, www.linkedin.com/pulse/ai-gatekeeper-culture-role-netflix-algorithms-shaping-udovičić-whrvc. Accessed 15 June 2025.

Weverse. “Weverse App Version 3.5.0 Update Details.” Weverse, 4 June 2025, weverse.io/notice/27504. Accessed 15 June 2025.