Would it? Another way to word this might be "Platform with 8,000,000 monthly streamers/listeners pays less than platform of 1,000 subscribers to view pictures."

I don't think this individual's identity enters into it at all. That sentiment comes across as a deliberate, mean-spirited attempt to denigrate this person.

Whether or not selling pictures of one's anatomy is a viable career, or a morally questionable career, or any questions along these lines are a separate discussion. This article to me points out the drastic discrepancy in two services, yet again calling attention to the issue of artists and their earnings when utilizing Spotify as a distribution platform.