Abstract
This study explored the phenomenon of social media non-use in the current platform-driven media landscape. Through in-depth interviews with young Korean adults in their 20s who have intentionally limited or stopped using Instagram, we examined the motivations, processes, and consequences of social media non-use and its broader implications within a platformized society. The motivations for non-use included multifaceted pressures from both the platform itself and the surrounding culture that promotes connectivity. Despite the strategies for non-use at different levels, participants continuously encountered challenges related to platform-specific resources, user experience, psychological discomfort, and social pressure. These challenges resulted in the renegotiation of disconnective behaviors, making non-use attempts nonlinear and reversible and creating a gap between individuals’ intended outcomes and their actual experiences. We discussed the mechanism of dual ambivalence that creates this cycle of non-use and the situation where non-use becomes captured within the platformization process, thereby being reduced to part of an adaptation process rather than a resistant practice.
The integration of digital platforms into everyday life has made them a fundamental component of contemporary society. The concept of “platformization” has emerged to describe a process in which data infrastructures, economic processes, government institutions, and cultural practices are interconnected and influence each other (Poell et al., 2019). This has led to individuals’ increasing dependence on platforms, due to the densely connected relationships within and between individuals, platform companies, and the social system (see Kim, 2025).
In this context, our study explores non-use of social media in a platformized society. Exploring non-use, a seemingly counterintuitive approach to the platformization of society, reveals the nuanced dynamics and implications of platform logics, including the pressures platforms place on individuals, the discontent they foster, and the utility, opportunity, and entertainment they provide. This analysis also explores how platforms engage with those who resist their influence, and how even small acts of resistance can trigger change within the platform ecosystem.
The pervasive connectivity and surveillance promoted by platforms for profit have led many to experience cognitive and emotional fatigue, making some to consider disconnection (Treré et al., 2020). In this “always connected” society, choosing not to use a social media platform is not simply a withdrawal from online spaces, but can be a form of resistance to the norm of constant connectivity, a difficult stance for individuals to maintain (Hesselberth, 2018; Van Dijck, 2013). The feasibility of truly disconnecting is questionable, especially in a highly platformized context where non-use is inconspicuous and difficult to maintain (Baym et al., 2020; Bucher, 2020). Bucher (2020) suggests that attempts to disconnect may inadvertently generate more data, making complete disengagement from the digital world nearly impossible. This research seeks to further explore how individuals navigate these challenges and experience the consequences of their decisions to disconnect.
The present study aims to examine (1) the various motivations for social media non-use; (2) the ways in which non-use practices are attempted, enacted, and/or succeeded or failed; (3) and the potential consequences and issues that arise from non-use behaviors in a platformized environment. Building on the research framework of Brubaker et al. (2016), who analyzed the motivations, processes, and outcomes of non-use, this study extends their framework to include not only the dynamic process of non-use but also the specific challenges of non-use in a platformized environment. Through in-depth interviews with individuals who have either stopped or continue to use social media, we examine the motivations, processes, and outcomes of social media non-use and their broader implications within a platformized society.
Media Non-Use
A word “not” can have various nuances and can be interpreted in different ways. A case in point is the well-known phrase “I would prefer not to,” uttered by Bartleby, a protagonist in Herman Melville’s short story Bartleby the Scrivener, which illustrates how an individual’s refusal has the ultimate potential to be understood in multiple ways. One’s passivity toward a particular action (in this case, work) can be read as a sign of political gesture, a choice based on preference, a psychological state (e.g. depression or pessimism), a lack of resolve, or perhaps none of the above (see Beverungen & Dunne, 2007).
When communication scholars began to study the rise of digital media, the debate about “not using” these technologies often focused on ability rather than willingness. In this context, discussions of media non-use can be understood through two main perspectives. The first is the digital divide perspective, which emphasizes unequal access to and use of digital technologies, influenced by factors such as gender, race, and socioeconomic status (see Hargittai, 2004). For example, Katz and Aspden (1997) pointed out that internet users tend to be wealthier and more educated than non-users. The second perspective is innovation resistance, which is based on the theory of diffusion of innovations. Here, functional barriers (e.g. low compatibility, perceived uselessness, and high risk) and psychological barriers (e.g. cultural change and the image associated with the innovation) can significantly increase resistance, leading individuals to either avoid using the technology or seek alternative solutions (Haythornthwaite, 2002; Ram & Sheth, 1989). Importantly, both perspectives share a common underlying assumption: new communication technologies that are not yet widely adopted are expected to eventually be adopted over time, and the process of diffusion is seen as a desirable and necessary development.
Several studies have challenged this pro-innovation bias and highlighted the potential for deliberate non-use of technology. For example, Selwyn et al. (2005) emphasized that micro-politics, arising from individuals’ personal circumstances, emotions, and motivations regarding internet use, must be considered alongside structural factors. Wyatt et al. (2002) introduced a conceptual framework to distinguish between involuntary and voluntary media non-use, distinguishing between those who have never used a technology and those who have stopped using it. Since then, numerous researchers have empirically investigated the phenomenon of intentional non-use. To synthesize the various discourses on this topic, we reconfigure the body of studies into successive stages that address the motivations, processes, and consequences of non-use.
First, research has identified different motivations for media non-use. For example, Baumer et al. (2013) conducted qualitative interviews that revealed various reasons for voluntarily avoiding Facebook, such as privacy concerns (regarding both other users and the platform itself), perceived banality, the need for productivity, addiction prevention, and social pressure. Other studies have focused on specific motivations, such as digital detox, which refers to a temporary break from digital technology driven by a desire for well-being and stress reduction in response to the digital world (e.g. Radtke et al., 2022). The concept of digital detox is noteworthy because it portrays digital technology as potentially harmful, in contrast to the traditional pro-innovation bias in discussions. However, the term has been criticized for perpetuating an outdated online–offline dichotomy that frames offline life as more “authentic” and for placing responsibility for technology use on individuals (Syvertsen & Enli, 2020). In addition, some studies have explored media disengagement with political motivations. For example, Portwood-Stacer (2013) analyzed media refusal among Facebook users, characterizing their abstention as a form of performative resistance to specific media platforms or brands, which she termed “consumer activism” within contemporary neoliberal society.
Second, voluntary media disengagement can involve a range of processes, strategies, and approaches. Rather than abstaining from media altogether, individuals may choose to limit certain aspects of their technology use (Miles & Thomas, 1995), take temporary breaks (Baumer et al., 2013), or implement various levels of non-use, ranging from permanent deletion to temporary disconnection (Bernadas et al., 2025). For example, Morrison and Gomez (2014) identified various forms of media pushback behaviors, including time management, application and account control, collective decision-making for media regulation, modifying or downgrading media use, compromising usage habits, and complete disengagement. Focusing on a single social media platform, Light and Cassidy (2014) categorized disengagement strategies into two main types: preventing connection, which involves passively avoiding or not initiating connections (e.g. ignoring or delaying friend requests), and disconnecting, which involves actively severing existing connections (e.g. unfriending). In addition, some people employ unique methods of disconnection using external software or applications, such as “swear jar” applications that automatically block calls, messages, and notifications to limit media use (Plaut, 2015).
Finally, scholars have also explored the consequences of individual media non-use. Baym et al. (2020) note that mindful non-use allows individuals to reflect on their digital lives and develop intentional patterns of social media (non-)use. However, such practices often go unnoticed by other users and therefore do not contribute to broader structural change. Portwood-Stacer (2013) adds that even when acts of non-use are made visible through public posts or statements, they are often dismissed as stubbornness, an unwillingness to engage with friends, attention-seeking behavior, or technophobia. In addition, Bucher (2020) argues that disconnecting actions, such as temporarily stepping away from social media, paradoxically generate more data for platforms due to algorithmic tracking. This highlights the complexity of disconnection, as it inadvertently reinforces the power of media platforms. Bucher calls for a rethinking of the ethics of connectivity, including the role of non-human actors such as algorithms. However, the recognition remains that actions intended to alleviate the pressures of connectivity or to resist media engagement often end up reinforcing the system they seek to escape.
Social Media Non-Use in the Context of Platformization
The media landscape continues to evolve and expand, increasingly dominated by platforms that mediate the actions of individuals, corporations, governments, and other entities (Kim, 2025). Van Dijck et al. (2018) define a platform as a “programmable architecture designed to organize interactions between users” (p. 9), structured and driven by data, algorithms, and interfaces, all underpinned by business models and user agreements. Understanding the contemporary media environment requires acknowledging the extensive reliance of various agents on platforms. Van Dijck et al. describe this era as the “platform society,” in which large-scale infrastructural platforms, mostly owned by the Big Five tech companies, wield considerable power. This shift can be contextualized through the theoretical framework of Plantin et al. (2018), who argue that advances in networked computing have allowed platforms to take on roles traditionally held by infrastructure. This has led to the “platformization” of infrastructure and the “infrastructuralization” of private platforms, blending the public and private spheres in unprecedented ways.
Existing research has extensively examined the process of platformization and the growing reliance on platforms from the perspective of platform users. Some studies have focused on producers, such as news outlets (Nielsen & Ganter, 2018; Pyo, 2024) and entrepreneurs (Cutolo & Kenney, 2021). For example, Cutolo and Kenney (2021) emphasize that platform systems inherently create a power imbalance between the platform and its participants, referring to those who run their businesses through platforms as platform-dependent entrepreneurs. There are also studies that explore the dependencies between ordinary individuals and media platforms, including users’ reliance on the algorithmic structures of the platform (Schaetz et al., 2023) and the behaviors they adopt based on their perceptions of these algorithms (Eslami et al., 2016; Swart, 2021).
Building on studies that focus on the experiences and perspectives of individuals, we examine the behavior of non-use within social media platforms to explore the platformization process in depth. Social media is an example of a platform that attracts individuals as primary users and profits from the commodification of their behavioral data for sale to advertisers (Srnicek, 2017). These platforms provide practical benefits through various functions (e.g. maintaining social connections, self-expression, or entertainment) while simultaneously monitoring and recording users’ activities, extracting and analyzing their data, and monetizing their attention through advertising. As a result, individuals find themselves navigating the dual nature of platforms: balancing their usefulness with the problems they present, such as addiction, over-connectivity fatigue, privacy concerns, and the exploitative structures that commodify their data. Thus, studying non-use of social media platforms offers valuable insights into individuals’ relationships with platforms, the range of experiences and challenges they face in a platformized society, and the active strategies they employ to cope with the surrounding media environment.
We believe this study is significant because it reframes the discourse on media non-use within the broader context of platformization. Through this approach, we aim to address the hesitations and challenges individuals face, as well as the diverse motivations and strategies behind non-use. This will help us examine how small-scale individual actions and decisions within platform environments contribute to either empowering or disempowering them in a platformized society. Building on the previous discussion, we propose the following research questions:
Method
Participants and Data Collection
Given the lack of a well-established framework for media non-use in the era of platformization, this study conducts in-depth interviews to gather meaningful experiences and build a theoretical foundation from individuals who have implemented non-use strategies on social media platforms. As previously discussed, media non-use includes both the complete cessation as well as the partial reduction or selective elimination of media use. Drawing on Woodstock’s (2014) theoretical characterization of media resisters as individuals who “intentionally and significantly limit media use” (p. 1987), we define media non-use as an intentional effort to either reduce or completely stop media use, often accompanied by a spectrum of anticipated and unanticipated experiences.
This study focuses specifically on Instagram users and non-users in their 20s in Korea. A national media panel survey conducted by the Korea Information Society Development Institute in 2023 revealed that this age group has the highest social media usage rate (96.1%), with Instagram being the most popular platform. Given their familiarity and proficiency with the current media system, young adults in their 20s are an ideal demographic to explore social media non-use in the context of platformization. The choice of Instagram as the primary focus of this study is also influenced by its widespread use in South Korea.
This study targeted two types of interviewees based on the theoretical definition of media non-use: active Instagram users who are considering stopping or reducing their use, and former users who have stopped using the platform. This approach was designed to capture not only strategies for temporary or permanent cessation, but also the day-to-day non-use behaviors that users might consider or enact during their engagement with social media. We primarily used snowball sampling to recruit participants, but also made concerted efforts to ensure diversity in terms of gender, age, occupation, and Instagram account status to minimize bias in our sample (see Table 1). Participants had an average age of 23.8 years and included 9 males and 11 females. In terms of occupation, our sample included seven undergraduate students, five job seekers, three graduate students, three employed individuals, and two career soldiers. In terms of account status at the time of the interview, 11 participants were active users, 2 had deactivated their accounts, 5 had deleted their accounts, 1 had an inactive account, and 1 had partially deactivated her accounts. The in-depth interviews were conducted in Korean, took place in February and March 2024, and lasted approximately 1 h each. Informed consent for participation and publication was obtained from all participants.
List of In-Depth Interview Participants.
Interview Protocol and Data Analysis
This study used a semi-structured interview protocol organized around three core research questions. First, participants were asked about their overall use of social media, including Instagram, their reasons for using these platforms, including Instagram, and the specific benefits they derived from Instagram. Next, they were asked about their motivations for reducing or discontinuing their use of Instagram. Participants were also encouraged to discuss their experiences with various non-use practices, detailing the implementation of these practices, the challenges they encountered, the strategies they used to overcome these challenges, and their assessment of the outcomes of their non-use attempts. Finally, the interviews explored participants’ experiences with sharing their Instagram non-use attempts with others. This included a discussion of how others responded to interviewees’ non-use attempts, and how interviewees perceived others’ attempts to disconnect from Instagram.
This study conducted thematic analysis, a qualitative method for identifying patterns and meanings within the data, following the guidelines of Braun and Clarke (2006). All interviews were audio-recorded and transcribed. The researchers then thoroughly reviewed the transcripts to familiarize themselves with the data. Initial codes were generated from the data extracts that were relevant to the research focus, and these codes were then organized into preliminary themes. This process of coding and categorizing led to a review and refinement of the identified themes, which were then aligned and grouped into broader dimensions according to the research questions. Ultimately, clear definitions and categorizations were established for identified themes.
To ensure the trustworthiness of the analysis process and the validity of the findings, the data and identified themes were cross-validated through collaborative efforts with other researchers. This included peer debriefing to critically review the research process, selected interview data, and preliminary themes. In addition, negative case analysis was conducted to assess whether identified themes contradicted the data or failed to adequately explain the data. Three researchers, all with backgrounds in communication studies and extensive experience in qualitative interview research, participated in this cross-validation process. The analysis reached theoretical saturation after the 15th interview, with no new themes emerging thereafter.
Findings
Motivations for Social Media Non-Use
The first themes identified in this study are motivations for non-use. This theme includes 11 themes organized into four higher-level categories: personal dimension, interpersonal dimension, platform dimension, and external dimension (see Table 2).
Motivations for Social Media Non-Use.
Personal Dimension
Within the individual dimension, a loss of interest was a significant factor that led individuals to disengage from certain Instagram activities. Some participants expressed that “the content on Instagram is no longer interesting” (#7), while others noted a decline in their motivation to post stories and updates, feeling that it was “pointless” when they were unsure if anyone would actually see them (#4). These responses highlight how perceptions of banality can arise from both consuming and producing content on Instagram.
Another common motivation for reducing Instagram use was concern about overuse. Several participants admitted to spending too much time on the platform, leading to concerns about potential addiction. This theme was often linked to specific offline circumstances, such as exam periods. In addition, some participants reported physical discomfort associated with prolonged electronic use, including “sleep deprivation” (#9, #12), “finger pain” (#10), “headaches” (#12), and “eye pain” (#4, #12).
Another motivation for non-use among some participants was dissatisfaction with certain Instagram features designed to engage users, such as recommended content on the Explore tab and short-form videos on the Reels tab. These features, which are often seen as encouraging addictive use, led some respondents to become aware of the platform’s strategies to profit from capturing users’ attention. For example, participant #6 explained, “I heard somewhere that the action of pulling down and releasing the scroll creates a lottery-like expectation that makes people keep scrolling until they find something appealing. Using the Explore tab feels like falling into a trap set by Instagram.”
Another motivation is a sense of information overload, which is exacerbated by some of Instagram’s features. Although the platform occasionally provides useful or interesting content, the relentless influx of information can become overwhelming, leading to fatigue and a subsequent desire to take a break. For example, participant #5 mentioned that she temporarily deletes the app when she feels “distracted,” especially when the algorithm persistently directs her to content that is only incidentally related to her interests. This widespread experience of information overload among users illustrates the instability caused by media content oversaturation, a concept discussed by Couldry (2012).
Interpersonal Dimension
Social reputation concerns also motivate some individuals to limit their use of the platform. This phenomenon stems from a fear of how others will perceive their frequency of posting. Ironically, it affects both those who think they post too often and those who think they post too infrequently. For example, participant #8 expressed concern that others would think, “I don’t have much going on and nothing to share,” which led him to curtail his overall activity. Conversely, participant #14 limited the number of stories she posted at one time, explaining, “I didn’t want to be seen as an Instagram-obsessed person who only cares about being visible.”
Another motivation for non-use is a sense of relative deprivation, which arises from negative feelings generated by comparing one’s own reality to the seemingly ideal lives of others presented on social media. Social comparison, which occurs when individuals lack objective or non-social standards by which to evaluate their opinions and abilities (Festinger, 1954), has been shown to be exacerbated by social media use, often leading to increased feelings of envy (e.g. Jang et al., 2016). Despite understanding that “what is presented on Instagram is just a cherry-picked slice of life” (#3), respondents reported moments when they felt that “everyone else has a more successful life” and that they were “the only one struggling” (#14).
The prolonged fatigue that results from constant exposure to other people’s posts and stories on Instagram can lead to exhaustion. This state of hyperconnectivity often discourages individuals from using the platform and staying in touch, especially when they feel obligated to interact with people they would rather not engage with. As participant #14 expressed, “I have to stay in touch with people I don’t want to be in touch with,” and as participant #1 noted, they are often inundated with posts and stories “I don’t really want to see and don’t need to see” from acquaintances with whom they are not very close. This fatigue makes temporary disconnection from Instagram a more appealing option.
Platform Dimension
The motivation to disengage from social media is also driven by a negative perception of the impact of the platform. Some participants adopted non-use as a form of resistance to the platform culture that promotes an always-connected environment. Disillusioned by the exhibitionism and oversharing that Instagram promotes, they criticized such behaviors as “completely negative social phenomena.” They believe that these practices “encourage conspicuous consumption” (#17), “distract individuals from everyday life and realities,” and “make everyone obsessed with images” (#3).
Some participants discussed the need to address concerns about the power of Instagram and its tendency to foster dependency, making it an essential tool for maintaining relationships, self-expression, and information-seeking among young adults. This issue differs significantly from simply managing overuse, as it involves not only a sense of wasted time, but also an ambivalent perception of the platform: while it is useful, necessary, and sometimes fun, its outsized influence can hinder independent agency. For example, participant #13 explained, “Everything is so easy on Instagram, and it feels like I can’t do much about it. I don’t like that there’s so much I’m missing out on because I’m not active on Instagram.”
Privacy concerns, fueled by the pervasive power of Instagram, serve as another motivation for non-use. For example, participant #20 deactivated her Instagram account due to significant privacy concerns: her decision was driven not only by the fear of exposing personal information and preferences, but also by doubts about the platform’s data management practices and the broader sociopolitical environment, such as the prevalence of illegal or deepfake images targeting women. In addition, the experience of account hacking (#18) and opposition to the platform’s practice of aggregating tracking data for monetization (#13) further underscored the importance of privacy concerns.
External Dimension
Finally, the influence of external persuasion against Instagram from articles, books, media content, and other people often intersects with other motivations for non-use. Several participants referred to the term “dopamine,” which has recently become a buzzword in South Korea, to describe various stimuli from digital media. They also mentioned influential bestsellers such as Stolen Focus by Johann Hari (#2, #3) and Dopamine Nation by Anna Lembke (#10), as well as videos featuring celebrities or neuroscientists on YouTube and Instagram (#4). This reflects the growing discourse in South Korea around the dual phenomena of “dopamine addiction” and “dopamine detox” (Lee, 2023).
Strategies for Social Media Non-Use
To explore the different strategies for non-use, we first categorized 12 themes into four dimensions: spatial-temporal dimension, app dimension, account dimension, and personal use dimension (see Table 3).
Strategies for Social Media Non-Use.
Spatial-Temporal Dimension
At the spatial-temporal level, setting time limits is a widely used strategy for voluntary non-use. Participants achieve this either by avoiding certain content and features, or by limiting their overall time spent on the platform. For example, participant #8 preferred to self-regulate his Instagram use, stating, “If I use Instagram less because of imposed restrictions or regulations, it feels like I’m losing to Instagram.” This approach often involves shifting focus to alternative activities, such as “exercising or reading a book” (#10).
At the personal use level, participants also employed unique methods to prevent themselves from using Instagram. These strategies included physical distancing from devices, such as “keeping the smartphone away from the bed” (#9) and “leaving the smartphone at home” (#5), as well as using other technological features. The latter included the use of various management tools, such as smartphone settings that lock or shut down certain apps when usage exceeds a preset limit. In addition, participants used “swear jar” apps, mentioned by Plaut (2015): “Yeolpumta” (#6) which blocks access to other apps during designated study hours.
App Dimension
Individuals can also attempt to curb their Instagram use at the application or account level. At the application level, strategies such as hiding the app from the home screen or uninstalling it from the smartphone are effective in “increasing the steps to access Instagram” (#11), which in turn reduces the frequency of use. Specifically, uninstalling the app allows users to experiment with non-use while maintaining their existing account status and providing the flexibility to access Instagram through the website if needed.
Account Dimension
At the account level, strategies to reduce Instagram use included logging out. In addition, several interviewees took steps to make their accounts temporarily or permanently inaccessible by deactivating or deleting them. Notably, when asked about the circumstances that led to these decisions, despite acknowledging Instagram’s many benefits, respondents often cited acting “on impulse” (#2, #11, #13, #16) or “in a fit of anger” (#1, #15) after reaching a point where they felt they “couldn’t take it anymore” (#14).
Personal Use Dimension
Individuals may choose to continue using Instagram while intentionally avoiding certain features or reducing their overall activity on the platform. Such micro-tactics of non-use within Instagram include unfollowing celebrities or friends, deleting previously shared posts, using Instagram’s built-in features to mute or report unwanted content to prevent it from appearing in their feeds, and blocking notifications from the app. These tactics are consistent with what Light and Cassidy (2014) describe as “suspension of connection,” which involves the intentional “undoing” of previous behaviors.
Challenges of Social Media Non-Use
Despite the various strategies Instagram users employ to reduce or resist platform use, several challenges can complicate these efforts. The difficulties associated with non-use were categorized into 10 themes, which were further grouped into four categories (see Table 4).
Challenges of Social Media Non-Use.
Platform Resources Dimension
A key challenge associated with non-use of social media is the frustration of not being able to access the benefits or resources that individuals once gained from the platform. A prominent issue is a sense of losing tools for managing social relationships. For example, participant #4 deactivated his Instagram account while attending a military academy because he no longer felt it was necessary. However, upon returning to civilian life, he created a new account to “reconnect.” Participant #16 noted that leaving Instagram meant “losing knowledge of the lives of acquaintances you don’t keep in touch with through other platforms and giving up a significant part of your connection.”
A sense of losing avenues for self-expression serves as another important challenge when leaving the platform. Participant #2, who had previously left Instagram, found herself returning to Instagram after joining a new sports club and realizing that she “needed a way to express myself more.” This theme also includes instances where individuals felt the need to “share well-taken selfies” (#14) or “show off everyday life” (#18) during periods of deactivation or after deleting their accounts. In addition, a sense of losing access to archived content relates to the records or memories that individuals had shared to express themselves and connect with others. For example, participant #19 was hesitant to leave Instagram because he feared that all the stories he had posted would be permanently lost. Even after deleting his account, he continued to regret the loss of these memories.
A sense of losing access to resources exclusive to the platform highlights a major challenge for individuals practicing non-use, especially when information and resources are prioritized on or exclusive to Instagram. For example, the absence of Instagram becomes problematic when “concert announcements from a favorite indie band are only posted on Instagram” (#18) or when they “want to access trending information that is difficult to find on other platforms” (#16). Although less common, some participants faced situations where using Instagram was necessary for business, work, or self-promotion. For example, participant #15 noted that he was “forced to use my Instagram account for marketing at a startup.”
Challenges related to the usefulness and resources of the platform are closely related to factors such as distraction and media technology addiction (Song et al., 2004). In addition, some of these challenges are related to the concept of fear of missing out (FoMO), which encompasses an individual’s fear of feeling excluded or disconnected from friends and social groups (Przybylski et al., 2013).
User Experience (UX) Dimension
Other themes of challenges related to social media non-use arise from the user experience (UX) dimension of the platform. One such challenge is the complexity of the opt-out process. Participants who chose to deactivate or delete their accounts often had to navigate a complicated process designed by the platform, with some even admitting to “googling how to deactivate/delete Instagram accounts” (#13, #19, #20). In addition, users reported being repeatedly asked to “choose why you’re deactivating/deleting the account” (#6) and being presented with “multiple alternatives” to discourage them from completing the deactivation or deletion. These so-called “dark patterns,” which use functional design to manipulate user behavior in ways that benefit the platform (Schaffner et al., 2022), have made it difficult for people to stop using the platform. They force users to reconsider or cancel their initial decision.
Another challenge is the platform’s functional incentives, which encourage people to reinstall the app or reactivate their accounts. Participant #13 noted, “When I try to access Instagram through the web, they say, ‘If you go to the app or log in, you can see more posts.’ Then I’m faced with a dilemma: should I just reactivate my account now?” Furthermore, the process of permanently deleting an account is not as straightforward as it seems, as Instagram gives users a “30 day period to reconsider the decision” (#20), effectively prolonging the finality of the account deletion.
These inconveniences can be seen as deliberate strategies employed by platforms to dissuade users from disengaging (Light & Cassidy, 2014). This approach is similar to the tactics social media platforms use to obscure acts of disconnection, such as not offering APIs that provide data on actions like unfollowing or muting. The overarching goal is to cultivate an “advertiser-friendly atmosphere” (p. 10) and sustain user connectivity to maximize revenue (John & Nissenbaum, 2019). It is important to note that these designs are not static. As revealed in participant #1’s experience, platforms continuously update their designs and features to actively “adapt” to attempts at non-use, with the intent of reinforcing user dependency by making the platforms an increasingly integrated part of user’s environment:
I once had to reactivate just one account to check some important news, while keeping all my other accounts deactivated. There hadn’t been any issues like this before, but perhaps due to a policy change, they redesigned the system so that logging into one account automatically logs you into all your other accounts. I had to deactivate them all again.
Psychological Dimension
Instagram is so deeply embedded in daily life that it can be challenging to stop using it completely. A common psychological hurdle is habitual return to the platform, where individuals find themselves repeatedly and instinctively accessing Instagram. Participant #8, for example, described the difficulty of resisting the urge to “watch one more Reels video before turning off the device,” noting that he often “wondered if I should just go back into the app and resume viewing” immediately after closing it. The anticipation of seeing newly shared posts or recommended content often led users to attribute their habitual relapses to a perceived lack of self-discipline.
Ironically, the success of initial attempts at non-use can sometimes hinder its continued practice. This phenomenon, referred to as diminished motivation, is common. Temporary non-use can be beneficial if it alleviates negative problems and allows users to regain value from the platform. However, the problem arises when individuals encounter the same issues and feel the need to disengage again for the same reasons. Participant #6 highlighted this challenge by stating, “The moment you think, ‘I’m okay now, let’s go back to it,’ that’s when the problems start again.”
Another theme of psychological challenge is skepticism about the necessity of non-use, which can arise from repeated failures or the perceived importance of the platform. When individuals become frustrated with their attempts to reduce use or dependence on Instagram, this skepticism can undermine their commitment to consistent non-use. Participant #13 epitomized this barrier, stating, “The more I tried, the more I thought, what’s the point of deleting it this time if I’m just going to keep going back the same way?”
Social Dimension
The final theme, peer pressure, subtly influences individuals to stay connected to the platform, acting as a social factor that complicates non-use. Some participants received direct comments from others, such as “Why don’t you reply to my DMs?” (#11) or “I should tag you in my post, but you’re not on Instagram” (#1, #13, #16). More often, however, the pressure was indirect. For example, participant #2 noted that she felt compelled to respond to other people’s stories “to show them that I care about them,” even though “it doesn’t really matter to me.”
Consequences of Social Media Non-Use
The final topic we identified, consequences of non-use, includes six themes related to positive experiences and four themes related to negative outcomes (see Table 5).
Consequences of Social Media Non-Use.
Positive Outcomes
Most of the positive effects were consistent with individuals’ initial motivations for abstaining. Participants reported being relieved from both physical and psychological discomfort, stating that they “slept better” (#4, #12), “felt refreshed” (#18), and “experienced a sense of freedom” (#5, #14, #20) after reducing or stopping their Instagram use. In addition, attempts at non-use allowed individuals to find information more efficiently. For example, participant #5, who frequently deleted and reinstalled the Instagram app, noted that removing the app allowed her to find relevant information more efficiently by avoiding the distraction of uninteresting, algorithmically recommended posts.
Third, strategies for not using Instagram help individuals disconnect from the always-on environment, staying offline. Non-users found that they could better focus on their offline lives, which included “taking fewer photos and videos” (#10, #15, #19), having “more conversation topics” (#1, #15, #16) when meeting with friends, and living a more “natural” (#10) and “colorful” (#20) life compared to heavy social media users. In addition, some participants found that non-use facilitated restoring true relationships. They identified who their “friends who really need me and want to stay connected” (#15) or their “really close friends” (#8) were, and they came to value those relationships more deeply.
Successful non-use also led to increased feelings of self-efficacy and a sense of control. These feelings were tied not only to the achievement of the non-use goals, with participants expressing sentiments such as “I feel proud that I voluntarily deleted Instagram” (#12), but also to a sense of uniqueness, as illustrated by statements such as “I feel like I’m special because everyone else is doing it and I’m not” (#14).
Finally, some interviewees who had previously left Instagram and later returned reported that, despite their return, they were able to use the platform in a more constructive way than before. The theme of getting healthy platform usage habits emerged as one of the most positive personal outcomes of voluntary non-use, as it indicated that they had gained the ability to engage with the platform in a more balanced way. For example, participant #10 shared, “I feel like I built a good lifestyle and usage pattern by deleting Instagram for a year.”
Negative Outcomes
Although participants experienced clear benefits from non-use, they may also face undesirable outcomes when considering the broader social implications of non-use behavior.
First, some participants who temporarily or permanently stopped using Instagram reported being excluded. This sense of being erased or marginalized goes beyond personal discomfort and reflects a broader social phenomenon in which constant connectivity through social media is seen as essential to social life. Participant #20 expressed a strong aversion to the social pressure to share and connect, recounting how she became “the one who didn’t participate” at a gathering simply because she didn’t have an Instagram account, noting that “only the people who were tagged seemed to be there.”
Another undesirable outcome of non-use is not being able to fully disconnect, which refers to a lingering sense of connection to others and the platform itself, even after reducing or stopping use. Participant #16 shared that even though she had been off Instagram for 7 months, she still felt like she was “living very close to Instagram” because her “friends are very active on Instagram and share a lot about what they’re doing.” This persistent sense of connectedness, despite not having an account, continued to generate negative feelings for those who practiced non-use. Participant #13 illustrated this by stating, “I feel exhausted all the time, even though I’m not on Instagram now.”
Some participants reported that they did not experience any significant hardship as a result of not using Instagram. However, a closer examination of their responses reveals that this perception was often due to other platforms compensating for the absence of Instagram. This leads to the third theme: using platforms even more broadly. Disconnection from one social media platform can lead to increased reliance on other platforms, deepening overall engagement in the digital world. For example, participant #19 noted, “I don’t feel like not being on Instagram makes me special because I’m still doing all the networking and information-seeking that I originally did on Instagram, on Twitter and my blog.”
The final theme of consequences is failing to frame non-use as a political practice. While participants were clearly influenced by social critiques of how platform companies capture attention and monetize behavioral data, and while they openly shared their non-use experiences, they did not see their actions as contributing to political or social change. Instead, they perceived their non-use as a deeply personal decision. Even when participants were socially conscious, they remained skeptical that their actions could have political significance. Participant #3 illustrated this sentiment by stating, “It’s harder to stop collectively because so many people are already doing it.” This tendency is also linked to a general apathy or inaction toward platform monetization mechanisms, which is reflected in the apathy or cynicism about privacy that many participants expressed throughout the study. As Draper and Turow (2019) argue, platform companies employ various strategies to cultivate digital resignation, making it difficult for individuals or small-scale agents to challenge the dominance of “multinational social media giants” (#13), especially when these platforms are perceived as “necessities” in modern life.
Discussion
The purpose of this study was to understand the phenomenon of non-use in the current platform-driven media landscape by examining the perspectives of individuals who have intentionally chosen to limit or stop using Instagram, and who have adopted various non-use strategies. The findings from the in-depth interviews can be summarized as follows. First, our interviewees displayed a range of motivations for not using social media, highlighting the multifaceted pressures that come from both the platform itself and the surrounding platform culture. These motivations were categorized into four dimensions: personal, interpersonal, platform, and external. Second, our respondents employed different strategies to implement Instagram non-use at different levels: spatial-temporal adjustments, app-level tactics, account-level actions, and personal use dimension. Third, participants encountered different challenges when trying to implement Instagram non-use, such as lack of platform-specific resources, user experience (UX) challenges, psychological challenges, and social challenges. Fourth, there was a gap between participants’ intended outcomes and their actual experiences. While most participants reported positive personal outcomes from Instagram non-use, their strategies also led to unexpected negative outcomes, such as feelings of exclusion and inability to fully disconnect, increased reliance on social media platforms other than Instagram, and failure to translate non-use into collective or political action.
Several implications can be drawn from the results of the current study. First, the findings of this study empirically demonstrate why and how social media non-use is a nonlinear and reversible practice, as hypothesized by Wyatt et al. (2002). A comprehensive model of social media non-use can be proposed in terms of the relationships between the main themes of our study (see Figure 1).
A comprehensive model of social media non-use.
Of particular importance are the identified themes related to the challenges of non-use, which play a critical role by providing a recurring point in the overall effort to disengage from social media. These challenges align with the social, material, and individual obstacles to digital well-being identified by Van Bruyssel et al. (2024), that is, systemic dynamics that cannot be explained solely by individual responsibility or capability. As noted by Brubaker et al. (2016), there is always the possibility that individuals feel compelled to return to the platform. This likelihood leads those who have attempted to stop using social media to “renegotiate” their level of engagement. The renegotiation process involves repeated lapses in non-use, the development of feelings of resignation and ineffectiveness, the reinforcement of motivations for non-use, the adjustment or reapplication of non-use strategies, and the experience of both positive and negative outcomes.
The crucial point is that the actors involved in this renegotiation process include not only the individual and their social network, but also the platform itself. For instance, the option to deactivate an account appears to offer users more flexibility because they can reactivate their accounts whenever they want, unlike account deletion. In reality, however, this option serves the platform company’s interests in two ways. First, it allows the company to continue holding people’s data, thereby contributing to data monetization (Karppi, 2011). Second, it keeps people as “potential users” who can return at any point, rather than as non-users. Not only the option to deactivate, but also the dark patterns that make account deactivation and deletion difficult, as well as interfaces that induce a return to the platform imply that platform companies have already adapted to users’ attempts at non-use, and are even capturing that resistance as part of the platform’s service or design. This demonstrates that resistance through non-use has the potential to bring about change within the platform ecosystem, which continues to adapt to this resistance. However, it also reveals that platformization incorporates even non-use into its process.
Second, this study extends the concept of media ambivalence to non-use practices in a platformized media environment. According to Ribak and Rosenthal (2015), media ambivalence leads to partial and micro non-use practices because (1) complete disengagement from the media system is rarely practical due to media convergence and ubiquity, and (2) the media system triggers both negative and positive emotions. Participants in this study exhibited media ambivalence, demonstrating that the reasons for social media use and non-use are closely linked: they valued Instagram for relationship maintenance, self-expression, information-seeking, entertainment, and archiving, but felt compelled to non-use when these benefits were realized excessively.
Instagram’s utility can be largely attributed to network effects, a phenomenon in which the value of a digital platform increases with the number of users (see Srnicek, 2017). These network effects also play a significant role in the various stages of non-use by contributing to user fatigue, a result of the over-fulfillment found in this study. In addition, platform companies increase their profits by exploiting these network effects, which in turn can trigger motivations for non-use at the platform dimension. At the same time, the strategies platforms use to maximize network effects, such as creating less favorable experiences for non-users, and a pervasive culture of constant connectivity as more individuals join the platform exacerbate the challenges of non-use. These dynamics can lead to negative outcomes, including feelings of exclusion or a sense of being trapped, which are further influenced by network effects.
Finally, the results of this study reveal another ambivalence in how individuals perceive their own behavior. Participants exhibited dichotomous behavior, criticizing themselves for failing to control their media use while simultaneously experiencing pride and a sense of efficacy in being in control through disengagement. This mix of efficacy and inefficacy suggests that individual perceptions and behaviors are shaped by conflicting societal norms regarding social media use. On the one hand, there is a dominant norm that pathologizes addictive media use where contemporary narratives of media addiction, shaped by individualism and capitalism (Vanden Abeele & Mohr, 2021), and media discourses (Jorge et al., 2024), place the onus of media use on personal responsibility, often viewing time spent on media as unproductive and wasteful. This perspective fosters feelings of guilt, shame, and powerlessness among those who struggle to disconnect, thereby hindering their ability to address the broader social factors that contribute to the problem. The norms advocating caution against excessive media use were clearly reflected in the participants’ motivations for non-use, indicating a deep internalization of these norms imposed by the external context.
On the other hand, norms of connectivity shaped by platforms and their users are pervasive in society. Van Dijck (2013) argues that social and cultural norms pressure individuals to engage in connective activities through social media, while platform companies seek to “code” sociality to profit from these behaviors. This study identified peer pressure as a direct manifestation of these norms, compelling individuals to suspend or abandon their non-use strategies and reengage with social media. Themes such as feelings of exclusion and inability to escape highlight the frustration individuals feel when they defy these norms through non-use. Furthermore, the presence of non-use motivation related to social reputation concerns—found among participants who believed they posted either too often or too infrequently—further underscores the influence of these conflicting norms. These findings are consistent with prior research confirming the existence of two conflicting norms within peer relationships: groups that encourage connection coexist with groups that support disconnection (Jorge et al., 2024).
According to cognitive dissonance theory, people typically strive for consistency between their beliefs and actions. When discrepancies arise, they change one or the other to restore balance (Festinger, 1957). At the individual psychological level, non-use efforts and positive justifications for such behavior can be seen as mechanisms introduced to alleviate dual mental dissonance stemming from media ambivalence and conflicting social norms (Ribak & Rosenthal, 2015). However, synthesizing the above discussion—that the platform’s underlying structure and logic, along with the external context imposed by the platform, peers, and society, continuously reinforce this dissonance during an individual’s non-use process, thereby creating a nonlinear and reversible cycle of non-use—shows that non-use cannot serve as an easy escape from such dual ambivalence. Rather, within platformization, non-use is normalized as a temporary behavior to better adapt to the overall media environment, rather than as deviant or system-subverting resistance. Participants’ hesitation or refusal to recognize their non-use as a political, resistant practice becomes the sociopsychological foundation cultivated within this normalization process. Although non-use involves action unlike resignation, the mechanism behind this sense is not significantly different from the cultivation of digital resignation discussed by Draper and Turow (2019). The implications of the dual ambivalence toward social media and one’s own non-use behaviors for long-term social media usage patterns or broader social norms remain under-explored. For non-use to persist as a meaningful act of resistance rather than a mere mode of adaptation, it must be actively articulated and discussed at both academic and societal levels.
This study has several limitations, and several areas need to be further explored in future research. First, the sample consists predominantly of young adults in their 20s who have not yet entered the workforce, which limits the generalizability of the findings, although we did not expect generalizability by using a qualitative method. In addition, the study’s exclusive focus on Instagram (non-)users omits the experiences of other major platforms, suggesting that future studies should expand to other demographics and platforms, or perhaps use a quantitative approach to explore social media non-use in the context of platformization. Second, this study does not consider structural factors and involuntary reasons for non-use, nor does it explore their relationship to voluntary non-use. Portwood-Stacer (2013) noted that those who can afford to opt out of social media often have significant social capital, and Nguyen and Hargittai (2023) observed that younger, more educated individuals are more likely to attempt digital disconnection. Jorge et al. (2024) also found that the teenagers’ ability to disconnect depends on family dispositions and moral economics. This suggests that the voluntary non-use behaviors discussed in this study may be influenced by underlying structural factors. Investigating such factors could also be an important task for future studies.
The state of “not” is often dismissed as mere passivity. However, when constant activity is the norm, “not” becomes an active practice and a form of defiance. Despite its limitations, this study advances the theorization of social media non-use by providing a comprehensive explanation of how individuals intentionally respond to and navigate a platformized media environment. This study also highlights the contemporary instability of resistance through non-use by examining the increasing influence of platforms that exert various pressures on individuals and establish conflicting norms within the media ecosystem, and by raising the possibility that even non-use itself may be absorbed into ongoing processes of platformization.
Footnotes
Authors’ note
This paper was developed based on Danbi Kim’s master’s thesis at Yonsei University.
Ethical considerations
The paper is based on the first author’s master’s thesis at Yonsei University, South Korea, where IRB review for master’s theses is not required, as the entire research and writing process involves at least two official evaluations with the thesis committee.
Author contributions
Danbi Kim: data collection, data analysis, literature review, drafting, and final editing.
Yong-Chan Kim: data analysis, drafting, and final editing.
Consent for participation
Written consent for participation was obtained from all participants.
Consent for publication
Written consent for publication was obtained from all participants.
Funding
The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF-2023S1A5A2A03083752).
Declaration of conflicting interests
The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Data availability statement
The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are not publicly available due to the potential privacy violation but are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.