>>69416864>>69417444>>69418758Losing even 80% of viewership means you can still survive off streaming and still be an online presence. That hardly counts as getting canceled. Yes it sucks to suddenly earn 1/5th of what you were making before but streaming makes such ungodly amounts of money for absolutely zero effort that you're still living a cozy life.
>>69419226Actors are different, in fact the extreme opposite, because they are contractors completely at the whim of the mega-corps that finance movies.
To make an equivalence it'd be like if twitch and youtube had absolute hair-trigger tempers when it comes to perma-banning people from both platforms.
The reason streamers can't truly die from bad reputation alone (at least to the point where they have to get a real job) is because there's nobody to fire them except for grand "deplatforming" acts reserved for Alex Jones-types and even then there will be third options like Kick.
