Actually, my worldview as a whole isn't quite nihilistic. A true nihilist would have no grounds to criticize, whereas my articles are critical of lots and lots of things. That means I have a moral center and a set of values and ideals that guide my judgments. (I aim to reconstruct morality from aesthetic categories, since those survive the hyperskepticism that goes with the rise of science and naturalistic philosophy.)
I agree that some artistically talented people will be poor. My point was that when it's harder to produce art, because the cost of admission is high, those talented poor people will be encouraged to let their talents atrophy and to enter a different field, because they'd have no choice. The proliferation of artistic media and other productive technologies empowers more and more people to create art--but still not to live as artists. It's still hard to make enough money to live as an artist or a writer, even though superficially it's easy to get hold of paper or a computer and to "publish" our work on the internet. It's a pyrrhic victory.
Where I think you minimize the problem is with your last line, in which you say "the cream is not guaranteed to rise to the top." That's an understatement, I think, since it ignores the systemic effects of this democratic empowerment. One effect is that this empowerment is cruel and tantalizing because it enables many people to feel like creators and even to produce a great body of work, but these artists will still have to compete with a sea of mediocrity. And democracies tend to lower their standards. When so many more people become involved, the most successful producers go for the lowest common denominator. That's why democracies are vulnerable to demagogues.
And that's why the most successful Medium articles, for example, are often those with only the most superficial merit, with clickbait titles, feel-good but trite messages, and so on. There are exceptions, but they _are_ exceptions. Sure, we can curate our contents, but it's easy to fall into information silos and to avoid contrary opinions, as has happened especially on the American right.
