Instagram: A Tool for Discovery not the Gatekeeper

Why organisers, curators and audiences need to look beyond Instagram when assessing an artist’s work.

Today, if you want to know about a performing artist, there is a good chance you will first look them up on Instagram. For artists in the Indian classical arts, the platform has become an important part of how they are discovered, by audiences, presenters, organisers and curators. And in many ways, this is a wonderful development. Instagram has made the arts more visible and accessible, allowing audiences to encounter artists and works they may otherwise never have discovered. For presenters and curators, it can open up possibilities and bring artists from different geographies and generations into view.

But discovering an artist and assessing an artist are not the same thing.

Instagram is remarkably good at creating curiosity. A performance clip catches our attention, an unfamiliar artist makes us want to know more, and a profile gives us a starting point to explore their work. The problem begins when that first impression starts to influence how we judge the artist, their work or their potential. 

Instagram is not inherently the problem. The question is how much weight we give it when forming our perceptions of artists and their work.

Here are three things INSTAGRAM does not tell us:

1. Instagram Measures Visibility, Not Artistic Value

A well-curated profile is not necessarily a reflection of a stronger artistic practice.

The first problem is that Instagram gives us very visible numbers: followers, likes, views and shares. These numbers can create an impression of popularity or relevance, but they tell us very little about the quality or depth of an artist’s work. 

A reel may receive thousands of views because it is visually striking, entertaining or easily understood in a few seconds. While another artist may produce work that is subtle, complex or less immediately accessible and receive far less engagement. The difference may tell us more about how content works on Instagram than about the relative value of the artists.  

A polished and well-curated profile is not necessarily a reflection of a stronger artistic practice.

2. Instagram Shows a Specific Moment, Not the Practice

An Instagram profile is therefore not a record of an artist’s practice; it is a curated representation of it.

Instagram gives us fragments. We see thirty seconds of a performance, a photograph from a production, a rehearsal clip or a particularly compelling moment. These fragments can create curiosity, but they cannot necessarily communicate what it means to experience the artist’s complete work.

Behind every performance is a much longer process that rarely makes it onto Instagram. There are years of training, research, rehearsals, experimentation, failures and refinements. Much of what makes an artist’s work distinctive happens away from the camera. The qualities that make a performance compelling may have little to do with what makes a thirty-second clip successful online.

Also, on social media, we naturally tend to share our strongest moments: the successful performance, the packed auditorium, the award, the beautiful photograph. We rarely see the work that is still developing, the experiment that failed or the questions the artist is still working through.

3. Instagram Shows Numbers, Not the Whole Story

Instagram must remain a tool for discovery, rather than becoming a gatekeeper for artistic opportunity.

The third concern is perhaps the most significant for the wider arts ecosystem: digital visibility is increasingly influencing who gets seen and who gets opportunities.

When presenters and curators use Instagram to discover artists, there can be a tendency to look at follower numbers, views and engagement as indicators of an artist’s relevance or reach. However, a large following does not necessarily tell us about the depth of an artist’s practice, just as a smaller following does not indicate a less established or less compelling one.

The greater risk is when these numbers become a filter: when an artist is assessed primarily through their Instagram presence rather than through their work. There is value in going beyond the profile: looking at previous performances and projects, collaborations, artistic journey, and the wider body of work before forming an understanding of the artist.

Not every artist has the same relationship with social media. Some are highly active and enjoy creating content. Others may not be interested in it. Some have access to professional photographers, videographers and social media support. Others do not. Some artistic practices translate easily into short-form video; others do not.

There is also a question of time. An artist who spends considerable time creating content and maintaining an online presence may appear more active than an artist who spends those same hours practising, researching, rehearsing or developing new work.

The frequency with which an artist appears in our feed should not become a measure of the seriousness with which they approach their art. This is creating a cycle where visibility produces opportunity, and opportunity produces greater visibility.

For presenters, curators and audiences, Instagram can be a starting point, but understanding an artist means looking beyond the profile to their work, practice, experience and artistic journey. Follower counts and engagement may indicate reach, but they cannot tell us the depth or value of an artist’s work. Looking beyond an artist’s online presence allows us to see the larger picture, their work, the journey and the practice behind it.

***

By Ramya Rajaraman

Founder & Director, ArtSpire