Abstract: This paper explores the dual role of Instagram as a platform for both empowerment and exploitation of users with disabilities. Drawing on sociological theories of identity formation, particularly Mead’s conception of identity as a reflexive and communicative process, the paper examines how self-disclosure of disability on Instagram contributes to identity construction, community building, and advocacy. While the platform enables users to challenge dominant social norms through body-positive narratives and expressions of solidarity, it also exposes them to trolling, cyberbullying, and commodification. The commercialisation of disabled identities may offer visibility and economic opportunities, yet often risks reinforcing stereotypes through tokenism and inspiration porn. Moreover, algorithmic pressures can incentivise the sanitisation or stagnation of identity performance for broader appeal. Through a critical analysis of scholarly literature, this paper argues that disability identity on Instagram is both an act of resistance and a mediated performance shaped by digital capitalism, where the potential for community is counterbalanced by the threat of exploitation.

Instagram serves as both a community of empowerment and exploitation for users with disabilities, where self-disclosure fosters community and advocacy, but can also invite targeted hostility, shaping disability identity on the platform as both an act of resistance and a performance mediated by digital capitalism. According to Mead identity is “an ongoing, reflexive process rather than a preexisting object/subject” (Mead, 1934, as cited in in Sorensen, 2007, p. 19). This process involves two-way communication between a person and their social environment, making it highly individualised (Sorensen, 2007). If identity is “a set of meanings applied to the self in a social role or situation defining what it means to be who one is” (Burke, 1991, as cited in Sorensen, 2007, p. 11) then disability identity is dependent on how an individual’s disability is released to or displayed in their social settings. Dunn and Burcaw (2013) say that “disability identity entails a positive sense of self, feelings of connection to, or solidarity with, the disability community [and that] a coherent disability identity is believed to help individuals adapt to disability, including navigating related social stresses and daily hassles” (as cited in Tollan, 2022, p. 3).

This paper will examine self-disclosure and self-representation of disability on Instagram and the benefits and risks of having this identity on a public platform. It will talk about the commodification of self with reference to disabled selves; how Instagram users can commercialise their identity, and how this can lead to both body positivity and body negativity. The paper will examine the use of digital platforms to construct, present and mediate identity, with a specific look at disabled identity as performance. Finally, it will touch on the reassurance and consolidation of identity markers through Instagram’s algorithm, which reinforces certain elements of identity while limiting the possibilities of further identity development.

Digital media in 2025 can either be “a groundbreaking opportunity for societal inclusion and participation or as yet another way that people with disabilities are excluded from participation” (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020, p. 73). Instagram is one platform that allows users with disabilities to participate, through interaction with both audience and platform; actions that can facilitate a decrease in barriers and stereotypes (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022). Tollan (2022) claims that Instagram presents an opportunity for youth with disabilities to explore their identity. However, the potential for hate speech (Burch, 2018), filter bubbles that reinforce negative elements of disability (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020), and obstructive commodification of disabled bodies (Christensen-Strynø et al, 2020) is endemic to Instagram.

There are two main models of disability in the research sphere. The biomedical approach, most common in Western medicine, is “intervention-focused and uses therapeutic interventions such as surgeries, behavioural changes, and pharmacological treatments to treat and control illness” (Routledge, 2024, p. 14). This model sees disability as something an individual should strive to overcome.

The social model of disability “views disability not as something that a person has (i.e. a physical or mental impairment), but as an oppressive societal relationship in which barriers and lack of access create disablement” (Cameron, 2014, as cited in Tollan, 2022, p. 4). This model allows that “what is disabling in one society may not be so in another” (Sorensen, 2007, p. 15), and so is a much more fluid and reactive model that removes the onus of disability from the disabled person (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020).

Research has shown that there are “both positive and negative experiences of social media for students with disabilities, ranging from an increase in communication ability, social acceptance, inclusion, reduction of boundaries and feelings of belonging to an increase in cyberbullying, victimization, and false perception of beauty/ideals, respectively” (Farley, 2022, p. 9). Therefore, self-disclosure of disability on Instagram can be a double-edged sword. “International studies have indicated that some individuals with disability tend to weigh up the potential benefits and harm of disclosing a disability online” (Bassey et al, 2023, p. 1149). Research shows that self-disclosure of disability on Instagram is becoming more common, enabling disabled people – who have been historically hidden and silenced – to have a voice and representation on this platform (Johansen, 2024; Mañas-Viniegra et al, 2024).

While it is possible to communicate on Instagram without disclosing a physical or intellectual disability, and therefore avoiding potential stigma (Johansen, 2024), people with disabilities seem to be using Instagram to tell their own story; to construct an alternative narrative and generate an alternative representation (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022; Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020). The narratives are not counter-culture among other users with a disability though – Tollan’s 2022 study found that some disabled users on Instagram viewed their disability as a prominent part of their identity but also spoke of “the normalcy of being disabled” (Tollan, 2022, p. 14).

Discrimination for not conforming to current ideals of physical beauty is something people with disabilities face every day (Ellis, 2014). On Instagram aesthetic standards convey lifestyles that attract the attention of particular audiences, and research “has pointed out that people with disabilities also post self-representative images that are leading to new stereotypes of beauty with a potential impact on users without impairments” (Mañas-Viniegra et al, 2024, p. 179). “Social media is also performative, and the performance of disabled bodies often challenges general assumptions about what is considered beautiful and attractive” (Johansen, 2024, p. 11).  There is a new story of disability becoming heard on the platform, and users with a disability are utilizing personal stories as a strategic tool to win over audiences (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020).

There are many positives to self-disclosure of a disability on Instagram. “Participation…could enable people living with disability to develop and maintain other meaningful relationships, increase the frequency and quality of their social interactions, and reduce feelings of loneliness” (Bassey et al, 2023, p. 1149), while also developing a positive disability self-identity and self-esteem (Bassey et al, 2023). Bassey et al (2023) also suggests Instagram has expanded the civic space, allowing users to advocate for their rights to general public and government alike. Cases like Madeline Stuart advance disabled agendas; “her consistent and massive presence has been marked by an explicit advocacy for disability visibility and inclusion” (Christensen-Strynø et al, 2020, p. 35).

Johansen’s 2024 study looks at social media purposes beyond social connection with friends and family, stating participants in the study employed social media “with the aim of altering public perceptions of individuals with disabilities, and importantly, how they themselves are encountered and engaged with in their daily lives” (Johansen, 2024, p. 12). Johansen calls this ‘everyday activism’, and indeed, other studies find people with disabilities find in Instagram both the opportunity for “construction of alternative narratives that challenge the dominant discourse and generate new representations” (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022, p. 3), and the tools needed to advocate for themselves (Tollan, 2022).

Individualism is a large portion of a disabled identity, as no two people experience disability in the same way (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020). This individualism extends to the wider social sphere; most socialization experiences of people with disabilities are with abled others. “They rarely get chances to model positive behavior and attitudes regarding their status as disabled. More often, they must base their self-perceptions on the responses of those around them who do not have disabilities” (Sorensen, 2007, p. 22). The use of Instagram to create spaces where users can interact with other users with disabilities allows for a sense of normalcy for many (Goethals et al, 2022).

Self-disclosure and the construction of a ‘disabled identity’ on Instagram is not without risk. Although people can choose how, when, and to what degree to self-disclose or not there is still the risk of stigma (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022) and even social media violence (Bitman, 2023). “Although individuals learn how to deal with social media violence regardless of their disabilities, social, cultural, and technical learning of how to be a disabled person in the world dramatically influences dis/ability performances and perpetuates the complexity of performing a disabled self” (Bitman, 2023, p. 1893).

Goethals et al (2022) looks at ideas around disability and normality, and the public perception of disability identity. Unfortunately, “a fair portion of disability-related material in the media is negative and offensive, and social exclusion is the daily experience of many people with disabilities…” (Goethals et al, 2022, p. 747). Instagram therefore is a tool to create social connection and cohesion, but due to the widespread negative social discourse around disability, self-disclosure on Instagram can lead to cyberbullying and hate speech (Bitman, 2023) which in turn, effects a user’s identity performance. Research shows “the Internet creates a ‘new frontier’ for spreading hate as millions can be reached through an inexpensive and encumbered social network.” (Burch, 2018, p. 394), and that “disabled youth tend to experience not only increased rates of cyberbullying victimization compared with able-bodied peers, especially autistics, but also to be involved in cyberbullying…” (Bitman, 2023, p. 1897).

Disablist language and hate speech are performed by individuals wishing to distance themselves from something they see as an unnatural state of being (Burch, 2018). “Hate speech preserves unequal power relations by denigrating the Other while simultaneously bolstering the superiority of the speaker. Indeed, it is often the case that ‘hate crimes’ are committed to reinforce the process of marginalisation, not simply because the perpetrator ‘hates’ the target.” (Burch, 2018, p. 402). There is a claim that “the discriminatory attitudes found in trolling are merely reflective of larger cultural biases and that the boundaries between trolling and normative forms of online and interpersonal interaction are porous” (Ellcessor, 2017).

Instagram gives users the option to commercialise their accounts, mostly through brand deals and affiliate marketing (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022). This opportunity extends to users with a disability, such as Madeline Stuart (@madelinesmodelling_) who has 334,000 followers on the platform (Stuart, n.d.). There are positive aspects to the commodification of disabled bodies, such as increased diversity and inspiration (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022), but it can also lead to inspiration porn (Farley, 2022), issues around the need to ‘overcome’ disability (Ellis, 2014), and problems with access (Bassey et al, 2023).

To lean into capitalism on Instagram, a user must first have social media literacy to access these spaces (Bitman, 2023). There are issues with digital divide, especially in third world countries that may not have reliable access to an internet connection (Bassey et al, 2023) and given the able-bodied-friendly design of devices used to access social media (Kaur, Saukko and Lumsden, 2018).

Inspiration porn and the need to ‘overcome’ disability are discussed by Farley (2022) and Ellis (2014), who see the phenomena as reinforcing negative stereotypes, and allowing abled audiences the reassurance “that social integration is the responsibility of the person with disability…” (Ellis, 2014, p. 491). The false stereotype of needing to be grateful and happy for one’s disability, while simultaneously wanting to overcome it through hard work, determination and a positive attitude (Ellis, 2014) harks back to the biomedical model of disability, where disability is something to be fixed or cured (Routledge, 2024).

Instagram as a platform was created as a capitalist venture. Users and researchers of the platform need to remember that “the demand for diversity in social networks is not just an altruistic manifestation of profiles of influencers with disabilities, but…is taken into account by the business sphere…”  (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022, p. 2). While Instagram users with disability like Madeline Stuart are celebrated and become popular on the platform, the ‘celebrification’ of disabled users – where their minority identity and status are monetized – reeks of the “exploitative cashing in on disabled subjects as curiosities and freaks” (Christensen-Strynø et al, 2020, p. 47) western society has seen since the event of capitalism.

Instagram’s algorithm is designed to create capital for the owners of and shareholders in the platform. What content we see is based on selections “made by algorithms…based on our online personal search practices and preferences” (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020, p. 80). This can create a filter bubble where Instagram users become increasingly separated from information and opinions that deviate from [their] cultural, political, and intellectual preferences and habits” (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020, p. 80) resulting in cultural, political, and intellectual isolation.

While the importance of knowing one is not alone and of meeting people in similar situations (i.e. other users with a similar disability) cannot be understated (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020), Instagram becomes problematic when the algorithm promotes homogeneity of easily digestible disabled identities, without examining the complexity and individuality of disabled experiences (Rice et al, 2015). Although “people with physical disabilities have found social media to be a source of support that is informational, instrumental, and social, which has had a positive impact on their mental health…” (Ellis, 2014, p. 483), and “disabled people are more vulnerable to social exclusion and isolation, along with associated psychological difficulties linked to these issue [where] Internet use could significantly reduce these social barriers to inclusion for disabled people by providing access to education, information, and social networks” (Tollan, 2022, p. 3), the algorithm continually serves content that reinforces narrow and repetitive portrayals of disability identity, limiting exposure to alternative diagnoses and abled identity markers (Routledge, 2024).

The problem of filter bubbles is twofold; firstly, it means portrayals of disability on Instagram can include naive images and narrow narratives that “superficially satisfy aims of diversity by providing sanitized, unidimensional depictions of disability, uncomplicated by other intersecting statuses [which] reinforce extant beliefs about people with disabilities” (Foster and Pettinicchio, 2022, p. 581). This can lead to users with a disability doctoring their features to conventionalize their appearance, “bringing them closer to prevailing industry standards and with what consumers are thought to be most comfortable” (Foster and Pettinicchio, 2022, p. 582). This effect mirrors the idea that “our culture is taught that disabled people live unlivable lives. We learn that we, as people who live in and with different embodiments, must normalize ourselves, apologize for our differences, or live uninhabitable embodiments” (Rice et al, 2015, p. 524).

Secondly, where there exists a more nuanced and truthful representation of disabled identity, users may need to continually adhere to that exact narrative to commodify their account. Although Mañas-Viniegra et al (2024) allow that “the continuous exposure to stimuli depicting various types of physical appearances improves the audience’s attitude toward new forms of beauty, and enhances young people’s acceptance of these alternate styles…” (p.179), some users have reported feeling “as if their For You page is a projection of their identity and subconscious beliefs, regardless of whether they held this self-concept before” (Corzine and Roy 2024, p. 2). The filter bubble created by the algorithm to access new content, but also to monetize accounts that represent disability, keeps users locked in performing a certain type of disabled identity (Tollan, 2022).

In 2025, Instagram “has become embedded in society and has offered many different spaces to various groups, both to those with and without disabilities to engage, share information and communicate with others across the world” (Tollan, 2022, p. 22). This paper examined identity, social advocacy and commodification on Instagram through the lens of disability. It found that there are positives and negatives to the self-disclosure of disability on the platform, and the creation and embodiment of a disabled identity (Farley, 2022; Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020). Body positive accounts and the alternate narratives they create challenge dominant social norms (Christensen-Strynø et al, 2020), but disabled users can face trolling, cyberbullying and hate speech in response to performing their identity (Goethals et al, 2022; Bitman, 2023). The commercialisation of disability identities can be empowering and opportunistic for users, but risks exploitation and ridicule through tokenism and inspiration porn (Bonilla-del-Río, Figuereo-Benítez and García-Prieto, 2022; Farley, 2022; Ellis, 2014). The reinforcement of dominant narratives around disability being reductive is often challenged by the positive affect expressed by Instagram users with disability (Cocq and Ljuslinder, 2020), but filter bubbles can mean users sanitise their disability disclosure for better consumption by mainstream users (Foster and Pettinicchio, 2022), or stagnate their identity in order to appeal to the algorithm (Corzine and Roy 2024; Mañas-Viniegra et al, 2024). Ultimately, disability identity on Instagram emerges as both an act of resistance and a performance shaped by digital capitalism, where self-disclosure can foster community and advocacy, yet also expose users to targeted hostility, underscoring the platform’s dual role as a space of both empowerment and exploitation for people with disabilities.

Reference List

Bassey, A., Meribe, N., Bassey, E., & Ellison, C. (2023). Perceptions and experience of social media use among adults with physical disability in Nigeria: attention to social interaction. Disability & Society, 38(7), 1146–1163. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2021.1983412

Bitman, N. (2023). “I Have Learnt These Things by Myself, Because I Always Thought That I Must Overcompensate for My Disability”: Learning to Perform Dis/abled Identity in social media. International Journal of Communication (Online), 17, 1893-1912. https://ijoc.org/index.php/ijoc/article/view/17856/4087

Bonilla-del-Río, M., Figuereo-Benítez, J. C., & García-Prieto, V. (2022). Influencers with physical disabilities on Instagram: Features, visibility and business collaboration. El Profesional de La Informacion, 31(6), 1-17. https://doi.org/10.3145/epi.2022.nov.12

Burch, L. (2018). “You are a parasite on the productive classes”: online disablist hate speech in austere times. Disability & Society, 33(3), 392–415. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2017.1411250

Cahyadi, A., & Setiawan, A. (2020). Disability and social media: Exploring utilization of Instagram platform as a tool for disability advocacy. Al-Balagh, 5(2), 223–250. https://doi.org/10.22515/al-balagh.v5i2.2746

Christensen-Strynø, M. B., Eriksen, C. B., Johanssen, J., & Garrisi, D. (2020). Madeline Stuart as Disability Advocate and Brand: Exploring the Affective Economies of Social Media. In J. Johanssen & D. Garrisi, Disability, Media, and Representations: Other Bodies (pp. 35–50). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429469244-3

Cocq, C., & Ljuslinder, K. (2020). Self-representations on social media: Reproducing and challenging discourses on disability. Alter, 14(2), 71–84. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alter.2020.02.001

Corzine, A., & Roy, A. (2024). Inside the black mirror: current perspectives on the role of social media in mental illness self-diagnosis. Discover Psychology, 4(1), 40–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44202-024-00152-3

Ellcessor, E. (2017). Cyborg hoaxes: Disability, deception, and critical studies of digital media. New Media & Society, 19(11), 1761–1777. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461444816642754

Ellis, K. (2014). The Voice Australia (2012): disability, social media and collective intelligence. Continuum, 28(4), 482–494. https://doi.org/10.1080/10304312.2014.907874

Farley, M. M. (2022). Experiences of social media and connectedness of young adults with a physical disability [Doctoral dissertation, Capella University]. ProQuest Dissertations & Theses. https://www.proquest.com/dissertations-theses/experiences-social-media-connectedness-young/docview/2724219379/se-2?accountid=10382

Foster, J., & Pettinicchio, D. (2022). A model who looks like me: Communicating and consuming representations of disability. Journal of Consumer Culture, 22(3), 579–597. https://doi.org/10.1177/14695405211022074

Goethals, T., Mortelmans, D., Van den Bulck, H., Van den Heurck, W., & Van Hove, G. (2022). I am not your metaphor: Frames and counter-frames in the representation of disability. Disability & Society, 37(5), 746–764. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2020.1836478

Hall, M. (2018). Disability, discourse and desire: Analyzing online talk by people with disabilities. Sexualities, 21(3), 379–392. https://doi.org/10.1177/1363460716688675

Johansen, S. L. (2024). ‘I just want to show that I am living a normal life’. Young People with Physical Disabilities on Social Media. Nordisk Tidsskrift for Ungdomsforskning, 5(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.18261/ntu.5.2.4

Kaur, H., Saukko, P., & Lumsden, K. (2018). Rhythms of moving in and between digital media: a study on video diaries of young people with physical disabilities. Mobilities, 13(3), 397–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/17450101.2017.1355349

Luis Mañas-Viniegra, Carmen Llorente-Barroso, Ivone Ferreira, & Mónica Viñarás-Abad. (2024). The Self-representation of People with Disabilities on Instagram. Comunicar, 32(78), 179–190. https://doi.org/10.58262/V32I78.15

Murray, S. (2020). Disability and the posthuman: bodies, technology and cultural futures. Liverpool University Press. https://doi.org/10.3828/9781789621648

Rice, C., Chandler, E., Harrison, E., Liddiard, K., & Ferrari, M. (2015). Project ReVision: disability at the edges of representation. Disability & Society, 30(4), 513–527. https://doi.org/10.1080/09687599.2015.1037950

Routledge, F. (2024). Exploring the Self-Diagnosis Experiences of Self-Diagnosed Autistic Women [Master’s Thesis, University of Toronto] ProQuest Dissertations & Theses.

Sorensen, A. (2007). I Think I Can: Identity and Social Experiences of Adolescents with Physical Disabilities [Master’s Thesis, East Tennessee State University]. East Tennessee State University Digital Commons. https://dc.etsu.edu/etd/2051/

Stuart, M. (n.d.). Madeline Stuart [Instagram profile]. Instagram. Retrieved April 6, 2025 from https://www.instagram.com/madelinesmodelling_/

Tollan, K. (2022). Exploring the Development of Disability Identity by Young Creators on Instagram. Review of Disability Studies: and International Journal, 17(4: Special Issue: Disability and Film and Media), 1-24. https://rdsjournal.org/index.php/journal/article/view/1103/2485