Although discussions of visibility often presuppose that it transcends the visual dimension, within short-video platforms, the realization of visibility is in fact highly dependent on a visually dominant communication environment. Through in-depth interviews with Douyin blind vloggers, this study reveals three layers of invisibility they encounter: operational, presentational, and algorithmic. To share their unique sensory experiences, blind vloggers have to adapt to the ocularcentric structure of the platform through strategies such as repetition, imitation, and compensation, reflecting the ableist pre-assumptions in today’s digital media landscape. Drawing from this “visibility paradox,” the study proposes a perceptual model of mediated visibility for future theoretical analysis and practical applications.
BhandariABimoS (2022) Why’s everyone on TikTok now? The algorithmized self and the future of self-making on social media. Social Media + Society8(1): 1–11.
2.
BishopS (2019) Managing visibility on YouTube through algorithmic gossip. New Media & Society21(11–12): 2589–2606.
3.
BitmanN (2022) “Authentic” digital inclusion? Dis/ability performances on social media by users with concealable communicative disabilities. New Media & Society24(2): 401–419.
4.
Bonilla-del-RíoMCastillo-AbdulBGarcía-RuizR, et al. (2022) Influencers with intellectual disability in digital society: an opportunity to advance in social inclusion. Media and Communication10(1): 222–234.
5.
BrighentiA (2007) Visibility: a category for the social sciences. Current Sociology55(3): 323–342.
6.
BrighentiAM (2010) Visibility in Social Theory and Social Research. London: Springer.
7.
BucherT (2012) Want to be on the top? Algorithmic power and the threat of invisibility on Facebook. New Media & Society14(7): 1164–1180.
8.
ByteDance Recruitment (2019) For 170 million people, we have made this transformation to Douyin. Available at: https://zhuanlan.zhihu.com/p/86947314 (accessed 20 January 2026).
9.
CharmazKThornbergR (2021) The pursuit of quality in grounded theory. Qualitative Research in Psychology18(3): 305–327.
CreechB (2020) Exploring the politics of visibility: technology, digital reresentation, and the mediated workings of power. Semiotica2020(236–237): 123–139.
Ellcessor and kirkpatrick (2017) Disability Media Studies. New York: New York University Press.
15.
EllcessorE (2016) Restricted Access: Media, Disability, and the Politics of Participation. New York: New York University Press.
16.
EmaraIHHallerBA (2025) “It’s weird for the people who aren’t used to it. And I want to make it less weird”: blindness community bloggers as legitimate voices of their lived experiences. New Media & Society27(6): 3720–3739.
17.
Gaižutytė-FilipavičienėŽ (2020) From visuality to visibility: regime, capital, media. Art History & Criticism16(1): 125–131.
18.
GogginG (2017) Disability and haptic mobile media. New Media & Society19(10): 1563–1580.
19.
HarrisKWillisE (2025) Disability influencers and self-representation: the intersecting medical and social models of disability on Instagram. New Media & Society. Epub ahead of print 1 October. DOI: 10.1177/14614448251373025.
20.
HeungSJiangLAzenkotS, et al. (2024) “Vulnerable, victimized, and objectified”: understanding ableist hate and harassment experienced by disabled content creators on social media. IN: Proceedings of the 2024 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Honolulu, HI, 11–16 May, pp. 1–19. New York: CHI.
21.
JainMDiwakarNSwaminathanM (2021) Smartphone usage by expert blind users. In: Proceedings of the 2021 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, 7 May, pp. 1–15. New York: CHI.
22.
JohnsonJKennedyK (2020) Introduction: disability, in/visibility, and risk. Rhetoric Society Quarterly50(3): 161–165.
23.
KohnA (2021) Self-representation of people with disabilities “Disabling” the audience, challenging aesthetic norms and employing ironic echoing. Language and Dialogue11(1): 59–82.
24.
LinZYangL (2022) The performative body of disabled women: toward the politics of visibility in China. European Journal of Cultural Studies26(5): 642–660.
25.
LuPGuoZ (2025) The sound of silence: Chinese Deaf creators’ self-presentation, labour practices and the visibility paradox on Douyin. New Media & Society. Epub ahead of print 17 May. DOI: 10.1177/14614448251338497.
26.
LyuYCarrollJM (2024) “Because some sighted people, they don’t know what the heck you’re talking about”: a study of blind tokers’ infrastructuring work to build independence. In: Proceedings of the ACM on Human-Computer Interaction 8 (CSCW1), 23 April, pp. 1–30. New York: ACM.
27.
MallettRRunswick-ColeK (2014) Approaching Disability: Critical Issues and Perspectives. London: Routledge.
28.
MartiniM (2019) Topological and networked visibility: politics of seeing in the digital age. Semiotica2019(231): 259–277.
29.
MateusS (2017) Visibility as a key concept in communication and media studies. Estudos em Comunicação25(2): 109–124.
30.
MayE (2025) Interrogating access: a critical disability studies approach to information practices research. Journal of Documentation81(2): 438–455.
31.
MeekoshaHShuttleworthR (2009) What’s so “critical” about critical disability studies?Australian Journal of Human Rights15(1): 47–75.
32.
MorrisJ (1991) Pride against Prejudice: Transforming Attitudes to Disability. London: Women’s Press.
33.
MoserI (2006) Disability and the promises of technology: technology, subjectivity and embodiment within an order of the normal. Information, Communication & Society9(3): 373–395.
34.
OliverM (2009) Understanding Disability: From Theory to Practice. 2nd ed.London: Palgrave Macmillan.
35.
OuY (2025) Data analysis of China’s short video industry: 46.80% of consumers choose Douyin for watching short videos. Available at: https://www.iimedia.cn/c1061/107308.html (accessed 26 January 2026).
36.
PetersJD (1999) Speaking into the Air: A History of the Idea of Communication. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
37.
RegaIMedradoA (2023) The stepping into visibility model: reflecting on consequences of social media visibility – a global south perspective. Information, Communication & Society26(2): 405–424.
38.
RongEZZhouMMLuZ, et al. (2022) “It feels like being locked in a cage”: understanding blind or low vision streamers’ Perceptions of content curation algorithms. In: DIS ’22: ACM SIGCHI Conference on Designing Interactive Systems, 13 June, pp. 571–585. New York: ACM.
39.
SannonSYoungJShusasE, et al. (2023) Disability activism on social media: sociotechnical challenges in the pursuit of visibility. In: Proceedings of the 2023 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Hamburg, 23–28 April, pp. 1–15. New York: ACM.
40.
SeoWJungH (2021) Understanding the community of blind or visually impaired vloggers on YouTube. Universal Access in the Information Society20(1): 31–44.
41.
SeoWJungH (2022) Challenges and opportunities to improve the accessibility of YouTube for people with visual impairments as content creators. Universal Access in the Information Society21(3): 767–770.
42.
ShakespeareT (2006) Disability Rights and Wrongs. London: Routledge.
43.
StehleHBockAWilhelmC, et al. (2024) In/visibility in the digital age: a literature review from a communication studies perspective. International Journal of Communication18: 5471–5493.
44.
Struck-PeregończykMLeonowicz-BukałaI (2023) Changing the narrative: self-representations of disabled people in social media. Przegląd Socjologii Jakościowej19(3): 62–79.
45.
SunW (2012) Subalternity with Chinese characteristics: rural migrants, cultural activism, and digital video filmmaking. Javnost – The Public19(4): 5–19.
46.
ThemelisCSimeJThornbergR (2023) Informed grounded theory: a symbiosis of philosophy, methodology, and art. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research67: 1086–1099.
47.
ThompsonJB (1995) The Media and Modernity: A Social Theory of the Media. Cambridge: Polity Press.
TuckerTN (2016) Grounded theory generation: a tool for transparent concept development. International Studies Perspectives17(4): 426–438.
50.
VendomeCSolanoDLiñánS, et al. (2019) Can everyone use my app? An empirical study on accessibility in Android apps. In: 2019 IEEE International Conference on Software Maintenance and Evolution (ICSME), Cleveland, OK, 29 September–4 October, pp. 41–52. New York: IEEE.
51.
WhitneyGKolarI (2019) Am I missing something? Experiences of using social media by blind and partially sighted users. Universal Access in the Information Society18(3): 637–649.
52.
ZhangL (2024) Designing accessible content creation support with blind and low vision creators. ACM SIGACCESS Accessibility and Computing137: 7.
ZhangYLiX (2025) Investigating short video consumption practices by individuals with visual impairments in China: questions of how to “see.”Disability & Society40(5): 1262–1284.
55.
ZolaLK (1991) Bringing our bodies and ourselves back in: reflections on a past, present, and future “medical sociology.”Journal of Health and Social Behavior32: 1–16.
