Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

Jason Nguyen

University of California: Santa Barbara

WRT 2 - Academic Writing

Valentina Fahler

August 19, 2020

Two articles that approach aspects of Twitch.tv, a growing live streaming platform, are

“And Today’s Top Donator is”: How Live Streamers on Twitch.tv Monetize and Gamify Their

Broadcasts and The Affective Labor and Performance of Live Streaming on Twitch.tv. Both of

these articles focus on the monetization and creative side of Twitch and are written by Marc

Johnson and Jamie Woodcock. The two articles utilize the disciplines of psychology and

economics and share some similarities when looking at their writing, including similarities in

evidence collection, writing disciplines, and structural organization. However, they differ in tone,

argumentation, and the discourse communities they create. When looking at the articles as a

whole, the main components of them both include the evidence that they present to others.

In terms of gathering evidence, both articles are similar in their methodology of

collecting and utilization, with both articles using interview data. Both articles use the literary

practice of interviews. Literary practices are defined as “the general cultural ways of utilising

written language which people draw upon in their lives” (Barton & Hamilton, 7). The similarities

begin at the writing disciplines they are involved in: the social science discipline, which involves

data collection using interviews or surveys as the methodology. Both articles also utilize

references to other works by paraphrasing their evidence whilst quoting to emphasize phrasing.

An example of this is in The Affective Labor and Performance of Live Streaming on Twitch.tv in

which the author states, “Streaming is a form of cultural production, entailing a ‘series of

activities that are not normally recognized as ‘work’—in other words, the kinds of activities

involved in defining and fixing cultural and artistic standards, fashions, tastes, consumer norms,

and, more strategically, public opinion’ (Lazzarato 1996, 132),” (Johnson & Woodcock 2019,

818). The quote used here is in a series of many quotes from different sources and is used as
Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

evidence to the main argument of streamers acting as personas, but is not analyzed any further

afterwards, possibly to be as a method in persuading empathy by showing evidence from

multiple sources describing the struggle of streaming. The use of evidence in the article “And

Today’s Top Donator is”: How Live Streamers on Twitch.tv Monetize and Gamify Their

Broadcasts is shown by the quote, “As Twitch (2018) claims, it is now a ‘ubiquitous’ platform

for videogames, one spanning ‘press/media, communities, developers, esports, events,’”

(Johnson & Woodcock 2019, 5). The quote is then analyzed to support the main idea of the

advertisement by showing the platform’s potential and bright future in the industry. Both quotes

are also cited using APA citation style and they are used in agreement with other similar

quotations to support their arguments / topics discussed. However, despite the similarities

between the evidence collected, the arguments they support are far from similar.

Regarding both articles, the way they produce and support their respective arguments are

very different overall with the psychological article seeking to invoke empathy while the

economics article seeks to influence readers of Twitch’s value. The psychology article argues to

get the reader to understand the realities of streaming as shown by the thesis statement found in

the abstract, where it is stated that the article offers “an examination of streamers broadcasting as

a ‘character,’ which we situate within the context of play becoming work” and “the labor of

performance and acting” (Woodcock & Johnson 2019, 813). The wording the authors are using is

trying to influence the audience to get a better understanding of how their field functions to

people outside of the platform by giving descriptive words such as “character” and “acting” to

help the readers dive into the minds of these creatives. The descriptive word choice is used to

paint an image in the reader’s mind and is fitting in an article about psychology. The economics
Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

article argues for the potential the platform which can be seen in the thesis statement of the

article found in the abstract stating that:

In doing so, we look to consider the particular kinds of governance and infrastructure

manifested on Twitch. By governance, we mean how the rules, norms, and regulations of

Twitch influence and shape the cultural content both produced and consumed within its

virtual borders; and by infrastructure, we mean how the particular technical affordances

of the platform, and many other elements besides, structure how content production on

Twitch might be made profitable, and therefore decide what content is made, and how,

and when. (Woodcock & Johnson 2019, 1)

This argument is to showcase to the audience the basics of the platform as well as potential to

influence the audience of its value using words like “profitable”. The word choice in this

economics article is utilized to persuade and is based largely on monetization, which is unique to

the genre itself. The two articles also create distinct academic discourse communities such as

how psychology involves researching the mind and has jargon related to the aspects of human

mentality with experts typically being on the higher end of medical expertise. However, the

economics article focuses on monetization and profits with jargon describing the potential

attributes and factors of success with expertise revolving around business and entrepreneurship.

Both of these articles contribute to the goals and tend to the audience of their respective

communities, with the psychological article appealing to scholars focused on social media

psychology and the economics article appealing to businessmen and potential investors in the

platform. Overall, the arguments both these articles articulate seek to invoke different emotions

in the reader which is possible through the phrasing and word choice the articles use. Despite the
Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

difference in arguments, the way that they are set up and formatted in their respective articles are

the same.

When comparing the organizational structure of both articles, there are many similarities

between the two such as the format of the readings. Both articles have an abstract at the

beginning outlining the data being collected and why, an introduction that talks about the general

background of the article’s topic and a preview of what topics are going to be covered, the body

of the article describing the methods of data collection and the results, and finally a conclusion

explaining the results of the study performed as well as alluding to the potential for further

research whether it be on the medium of live streaming or for more future research on Twitch

itself. All of which were featured in both articles with little changes mostly regarding the body of

the article due to the differing areas of focus on Twitch streaming. Both articles then end with

references to the sources used and a biographical paragraph of the authors. The organization of

the articles are the same due to the genres of social sciences and academic articles in general.

The placement and flow of the articles have been established previously and both articles follow

those unwritten rules. However, the format and organization do little to create a distinct and

unique atmosphere from one another, but a factor that does help is the tone of the articles.

When discussing the tones of both articles, they are both unique and utilize the tones of

their respective articles differently to try and influence the audiences towards acknowledging

their individual arguments. The article based on the psychology of streamers utilizes a more

personal tone through use of quotes directly from the interviewees to highlight the phrasing they

use to get to know them on a personal level. An example of this being a quote from a streamer

named Daniel who states that, “the act of streaming should be understood fundamentally as ‘a
Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

performance,’ including the need to emotionally prepare and ensure the performer is in the right

‘mood’ beforehand” (Johnson & Woodcock 2019, 817). This quote shows both the vernacular

used to describe the psychology of streaming as an acting experience and shows a personal

account of streaming on Twitch from a first person source. Contrarily, the economics article is

more informational and analytical, only utilising phrasing from outlookers describing the

platform making the article feel like you are on the outside looking at the platform as a whole

while also having a persuasive tone to influence the audience of its potential value. An example

of this being a quote from the economics article stating that, “ Such a wide variety of

monetization methods is possible because the platform is relatively devoid of explicit rules or

regulations preventing streamer behaviors, allowing for consistent innovation and change within

the broader structure of the live stream.” (Woodcock & Johnson 2019, 8). This excerpt explains

Twitch in a matter-of-fact way and utilizes a passive voice letting the platform be of focus and

the features built into it. The tone of this is informational and seeks to appeal to logic and seeing

into the future of the platform rather than emotional appeal. The sentences written in the articles

help the reader fully understand the topics while using sources and references to others either by

paraphrasing or quoting to support their arguments and appeal to your emotions or to your mind

logically. The two articles also use jargon related to their topics with the psychological article

using vocabulary related to acting, characterization, theatrics, and the social side of Twitch whilst

the economics article uses vernacular related to the potential and monetization of Twitch. The

tones and vocabulary used by both articles are very different from each other and seek to

accomplish different goals.

In conclusion, the articles possess a variety of similarities and differences. Similarities

among the two are their organization, their disciplines, their method of gathering data, and

sentence structure, but the tones they imply and the purposes they work towards in getting people

to understand their arguments are different as well as how they express themselves to their

respective audiences and communities. The writing conventions that both articles use are similar,

yet the purposes they are working towards are different in the ways they seek to influence their

audiences. Analyzing the two articles really showcases how authors can utilize their writing

differently based on the factors of audience, genre, and discipline. Understanding the reasons

behind their actions are a strong way to improve your writing and form a solid foundation for

writing in general.
Comparing and Contrasting the Mind and Money

References

Barton, D., & Hamilton, M.(1999). Situated Literacies: Theorising Reading and Writing in

Context (1st ed.). Routledge

Johnson, M., & Woodcock, J. (2019, November 25). “And Today’s Top Donator is”: How Live

Streamers on Twitch.tv Monetize and Gamify Their Broadcasts. Sage Journals.

https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/doi/pdf/10.1177/205630511988

1694

Melzer, D. (2020). Writing Spaces: Readings on Writing Volume 3 (3). Parlor Press.

Woodcock, J., & Johnson, M. (2019, May 29). The Affective Labor and Performance of Live

Streaming on Twitch.tv. Sage Journals.

https://journals-sagepub-com.proxy.library.ucsb.edu:9443/doi/full/10.1177/15274764198

51077