> male influencers are paid almost 100% more

This isn't entirely surprising. They're much more rare so there is lot more competition for their services, piled on top of the usual biases in our society against paying women equally.

Or it could be that since women are more desirable there is a larger section of women paid lower than the top earners. C.f. print media sales, top 5 authors are making all of the money.

> Women charge an average of $351 while Men charge $459.[1]

That's 31% more, not almost 100% more.

I can't see the full data, but as I assume they didn't just blatantly make that up men also likely receive more deals. In normal business terms, women would get 31% less per hour and also x fewer hours.

There is clearly some nuance here, that they aren't making clear in order to headline "most surprising result" without context.

It seems more like they're just teasing part of their paid service, which is why I don't think they're trying to be misleading with the claim.

> "Though women make up 77% of the influencer market, male influencers are paid almost 100% more. " [1]

But thats how suply-and-demand workforce always work doesn't it? Too much people doing the same job tends to lower the wage for that job; and because a lot of companies compite for different markets when sponsoring a male influencers vs female influencers (e.g. "this is the shaving cream I use" vs "this is the bra's brand I use") they are income-wise 2 different jobs.

I would like more data for [1], with a breakdown per gender of each category and size. The data they show could be under the effect of a Simpsons paradox from the way they present it.