It /is/ misleading to say or imply that it is a co-op, though. It isn’t. It may be a progressive company which provides very favourable terms to creators, but it isn’t a co-op.
After reading the article, I walked away with "well, they were vague about the terms, but the real terms sound fine to me."
But your comment changed my mind somewhat: it definitely isn't a co-op, and the "creator owned" language is misleading.
I appreciate that in a full co-op dilution is a concern if they need external investors (e.g., Curiosity Stream) but you could have a structure with 50% co-op ownership and 50% capital ownership, so dilution as the platform expands would only affect the other co-operative owners.