Philip Pullman: professional writers set to become 'an endangered species'

Content creators are still consumers. An artist can still read poetry, go the theatre, etc. So, if the vast majority of population goes into creative endeavors, the demand for creative labor isn't going to increase; all of the content creators are still content consumers.

The demand isn't there because people are at work. More leisure time should create more demand for leisure activities.

You are thinking about things incorrectly I think.

Lets say that ubiquitous automation reduces employment in many manufacturing and service sectors. Prices will fall in those sectors, abundance will increase. People will need to spend less of their income for these goods and services. The additional income will be used for other things. Some of the other things will be things like books, music, etc.

If you doubt what I say, think about how spending patterns changed when the economy went from 90% employment in agriculture to 2% employment in agriculture. Prior to this transition, something like 70% of wage was spent on food. Afterwards less than 10% was spent on food.

In the future, something like 10% of income might be spent on all non-digital goods and services, and 90% of income might be spent on the virtual economy (games, books, music, film, etc.)

IMO, I think the demand is there. It seems to me that our economic model just isn't ready to handle how we distribute/consume art. Once the art is created digitally, it basically costs $0 to reproduce it, yet we're still stuck on the idea that a "book" costs ~$20 each, and a generous portion of that goes to the distributor.

IMO, we don't even need distributors. I should be able to go to the author's website on my kindle, and download the book for much less than $20. And all of that would go directly to the author, not the distributor.

(I know a lot of this reply has a lot of hand-waving and over-simplification, trying to keep it concise)