4 ms·

People at the top of the pay scale are being paid an obscene amount of money for similar quality work that goes unpaid in many cases. From that they can hire te

People at the top of the pay scale are being paid an obscene amount of money for similar quality work that goes unpaid in many cases. From that they can hire teams of others to push their brand further. In order to compete, others need to go into debt just to be able to keep up. In order to admit that the highest paid streamers fairly made it to their current levels of obscene payment, it would be a lot more believable if there wasn't such a huge disparity in pay (from my perspective). I work with analytics, and understand them well. Twitch creates their own non-transparent algorithm that evaluates metrics and determines pay for contributors based on those factors. Twitch is in complete control over the rules for who gets paid and how much they are paid. In a fair creator economy yes, some would get rich and some would go unpaid, but the gap would not be that huge. Technically most of the contributing creators should be paid and promoted by the platform equally, and accurate metrics would determine who stays on top, but these days creators are not treated equally based on the data I've seen thus far. The inequality reflects on our current societal problems as well. The gap between top and bottom creators is massive based on data from Twitch, tons of people are technically working for free over many years in hopes of being discovered. The level of labor and efforts in being a platform user and a creator are very high, the problem is when success is only an illusion. Even as an unpaid creator, if the platform only promotes it's top creators, their profits surge while no one off the radar gets discovered, and thus the unequal profit cycle is upheld without anyone knowing the truth of skewed reality. Algorithms frequently reflect bias on all social media now because they are developed by companies and people that often have bias (towards making profit, or for political purposes, etc.). Even very talented creators don't stand a chance of being recognized or paid for their work because of that bias that drives profit on massive social media platforms because they are too often profit-driven machines.

jollybean 5y ago
Again I think you've misunderstood the dynamics of this micro economy. 'Obscene' is a superlative not hugely relevant here unless you start with calling pro-athletes and actors getting paid 'millions' as 'obscene'. Twitch streamers have even considerably lower barriers to entry than athletes or actors. In the later case, probably 1/2 of well known actors are born into the industry. Athletes work through a selective system that is gamed so is the workplace. On Twitch - people are paid literally in donations from viewers, there are no powerful layers of value chain here, which is a very powerful signal of valid intent on the part of those being entertained. Twitch Entertainers is possibly one of the most free, open and fair markets going. Once again: your hints of 'money to pay people for promotion' isn't valuable foremost because 1) 'marketing' exists in all professions (actors have agents, press people, managers and work in a highly controlled system of promotion and 2) those activities are scant and not powerful. Nick Merc is not paying big bucks for marketing, and it wouldn't get him anywhere anyhow. "Technically most of the contributing creators should be paid and promoted by the platform equally," - no. They should be promoted fairly - which they are. Obviously there is some incumbency in that more popular people get promoted more, however, there's ample opportunity for long tail discovery. The truth is (and this is a very key understanding) most creators are not creating interesting content. Full Stop. "The inequality reflects on our current societal problems as well." - no, there's little parallel here. "The level of labor and efforts in being a platform user and a creator are very high," - this is not relevant. Nobody cares how much work or effort goes into the content creation. They want to be entertained with good gameplay or charismatic personalities, and that's it. "Even very talented creators don't stand a chance of being recognized " - totally the opposite. They have a very good chance of getting some viewers, and if they have something people want to see, more will tune in. The reality is, like everything in life - 'most people are not good at it' and the eyeballs are going to veer towards the more talented streamers. Frankly, I think they get paid too much, I'm glad they get paid something but I'm not going to give them my money. That said, the system is pretty good. A lot of people making a living out of playing video games, and a lot of people seem to be entertained by that.
q1w2 5y ago
> obscene amount of money for similar quality work If it were similar work, then subscriber numbers wouldn't be so different.

jollybean 5y ago

Again I think you've misunderstood the dynamics of this micro economy. 'Obscene' is a superlative not hugely relevant here unless you start with calling pro-athletes and actors getting paid 'millions' as 'obscene'. Twitch streamers have even considerably lower barriers to entry than athletes or actors. In the later case, probably 1/2 of well known actors are born into the industry. Athletes work through a selective system that is gamed so is the workplace. On Twitch - people are paid literally in donations from viewers, there are no powerful layers of value chain here, which is a very powerful signal of valid intent on the part of those being entertained. Twitch Entertainers is possibly one of the most free, open and fair markets going. Once again: your hints of 'money to pay people for promotion' isn't valuable foremost because 1) 'marketing' exists in all professions (actors have agents, press people, managers and work in a highly controlled system of promotion and 2) those activities are scant and not powerful. Nick Merc is not paying big bucks for marketing, and it wouldn't get him anywhere anyhow. "Technically most of the contributing creators should be paid and promoted by the platform equally," - no. They should be promoted fairly - which they are. Obviously there is some incumbency in that more popular people get promoted more, however, there's ample opportunity for long tail discovery. The truth is (and this is a very key understanding) most creators are not creating interesting content. Full Stop. "The inequality reflects on our current societal problems as well." - no, there's little parallel here. "The level of labor and efforts in being a platform user and a creator are very high," - this is not relevant. Nobody cares how much work or effort goes into the content creation. They want to be entertained with good gameplay or charismatic personalities, and that's it. "Even very talented creators don't stand a chance of being recognized " - totally the opposite. They have a very good chance of getting some viewers, and if they have something people want to see, more will tune in. The reality is, like everything in life - 'most people are not good at it' and the eyeballs are going to veer towards the more talented streamers. Frankly, I think they get paid too much, I'm glad they get paid something but I'm not going to give them my money. That said, the system is pretty good. A lot of people making a living out of playing video games, and a lot of people seem to be entertained by that.

q1w2 5y ago

> obscene amount of money for similar quality work If it were similar work, then subscriber numbers wouldn't be so different.