Research
This article summarizes findings from original research conducted by Miguel A. Davila. It is intended as an accessible overview of the study and should be read alongside the complete research protocol.
Full Research Protocol
Davila, M. A. (2025). How do disabled entrepreneurs understand and use digital media to advertise their businesses? CUNY School of Labor and Urban Studies.
Research Protocol Repository: https://daar.llc/research-protocols/
Introduction
Digital technologies have become central to participation in contemporary economic life. Entrepreneurs increasingly rely on websites, social media platforms, search engines, digital advertising networks, email marketing systems, and content creation tools to reach customers and sustain business operations. While these technologies have created new opportunities for business development, access to those opportunities remains unevenly distributed.
My research examined how disabled entrepreneurs understand and use digital media advertising within the United States. Specifically, the study explored the intersection of disability, entrepreneurship, digital media advertising, and structural inequality. Through a combination of interdisciplinary literature review and original survey research, I investigated how entrepreneurs with disabilities navigate digital advertising environments while confronting economic, social, and technological barriers (Davila, 2025, pp. 25–26).
The findings suggest that digital media advertising functions simultaneously as a mechanism of opportunity and a site of exclusion. Although digital technologies can increase visibility, communication, and market access, they also reflect broader inequalities embedded within contemporary social and economic systems. Understanding this tension is essential for researchers, policymakers, technology developers, and business leaders seeking to promote more equitable participation in the digital economy.
Disability and Digital Participation
The literature review for this project drew upon scholarship from disability studies, sociology, communication studies, labor studies, and human-computer interaction. Across these disciplines, a consistent theme emerged: individuals with disabilities frequently encounter barriers when attempting to access digital technologies, online platforms, and Internet-based services (Davila, 2025, pp. 15–20).
Digital participation has become increasingly necessary for employment, entrepreneurship, education, communication, and social inclusion. However, access to digital technologies remains uneven. Differences in financial resources, assistive technology availability, digital literacy, educational opportunities, and institutional support contribute to persistent inequalities affecting disabled individuals (Davila, 2025, pp. 16–20).
A particularly significant finding from the literature concerns accessibility in technological development. Scholars consistently argue that accessibility should be integrated into technology design from the earliest stages of development rather than introduced later as a modification. When accessibility is treated as an afterthought, exclusion often becomes embedded within the technological system itself (Davila, 2025, pp. 16–20).
The literature also highlighted how institutionalized ableism has historically influenced the design of technologies, workplaces, services, and public systems. As a result, disabled individuals have frequently encountered barriers to participation that extend beyond individual impairments and reflect broader social arrangements (Davila, 2025, pp. 15–17).
These findings demonstrate that technological inequality cannot be understood solely as a technical issue. Rather, accessibility is fundamentally connected to questions of social justice, inclusion, and equitable participation.
Accessibility, Markets, and Structural Inequality
My review of the literature further situated disability and technological inequality within larger economic and institutional structures. Accessibility initiatives are often pursued only when they align with organizational priorities, profitability, or market incentives. Consequently, inclusion may become conditional rather than universally guaranteed (Davila, 2025, pp. 18–20).
Several scholars examined in the review argued that technological systems reflect broader social and economic arrangements. Access to digital resources is influenced not only by technological availability but also by labor markets, public policy, education systems, and financial resources. Therefore, digital inequality cannot be separated from larger systems of power and social organization (Davila, 2025, pp. 18–20).
These observations challenge narratives suggesting that technological innovation automatically produces equality. Technologies can create opportunities, but they can also reproduce exclusion when accessibility and equity are not prioritized during development and implementation.
As digital systems become increasingly central to everyday life, accessibility must be understood as a collective responsibility rather than an optional accommodation. Equitable participation requires intentional design decisions that recognize diverse user experiences and needs.
Language, Disability, and Institutional Power
Another major component of the research explored the relationship between disability, language, classification systems, and institutional authority. Language plays an important role in shaping how disability is understood, represented, and regulated within society (Davila, 2025, pp. 21–24).
Historical shifts in disability terminology illustrate changing social understandings of disability. Terms such as handicapped and disabled do more than describe individuals; they also reflect broader social attitudes and influence how people are categorized within institutions (Davila, 2025, pp. 21–24).
The literature further suggested that professional classification systems contribute to determining who is considered legitimate, knowledgeable, and qualified within various social contexts. Such systems influence access to authority, expertise, and resources while shaping perceptions of competence and productivity. Individuals whose identities or experiences fall outside dominant institutional norms may encounter barriers to recognition and participation (Davila, 2025, pp. 21–24).
From this perspective, disability is not simply an individual characteristic. Rather, disability is also shaped by institutional practices, systems of classification, and social structures that influence whose contributions are recognized and valued.
Addressing a Gap in Existing Scholarship
Although substantial scholarship has examined disability and technology, relatively little research has focused specifically on disabled entrepreneurs and their use of digital media advertising. Addressing this gap provided the primary motivation for the study (Davila, 2025, pp. 25–26).
To investigate this issue, I conducted original survey research involving entrepreneurs with disabilities residing in the United States. For the purposes of the study, an entrepreneur was operationally defined as an individual who owns 100% equity in a legally state-registered private business entity. Digital media advertising was defined as paid digital promotional services used to actively advertise a business online (Davila, 2025, pp. 26–27).
The research sought to understand how disabled entrepreneurs define digital media, how they use digital advertising tools, what benefits they associate with digital media, and what barriers they encounter when attempting to access digital advertising resources.
Participant Recruitment and Study Characteristics
The recruitment process itself revealed important insights concerning entrepreneurship and disability. A total of 208 individuals initially expressed interest in participating in the study. However, only six eligible participants ultimately completed the survey (Davila, 2025, pp. 27–28).
Most exclusions resulted from the study’s operational definition of entrepreneurship. The largest exclusion category involved individuals who did not own 100% equity in their businesses. Additional exclusions involved non-U.S. residency, failure to self-identify as disabled, lack of digital advertising use, or failure to satisfy other eligibility criteria (Davila, 2025, pp. 27–28).
Although the final sample was small, participants represented multiple geographic regions, business structures, disability experiences, and gender identities. Participants resided in New York, California, and West Virginia, while their businesses were registered across several states. The sample included female, male, and non-binary participants and reflected a range of disability experiences and characteristics (Davila, 2025, pp. 27–28).
What Disabled Entrepreneurs Reported
The findings indicate that digital media advertising plays an important role in the entrepreneurial activities of disabled business owners. Participants generally viewed digital technologies as valuable tools for communication, customer engagement, business visibility, and networking.
When asked to define digital media, most participants associated the concept with Internet-based communication, websites, social media platforms, and digital communication technologies. Their responses suggest that digital media is understood as both a technological resource and a communication infrastructure (Davila, 2025, pp. 33–34).
Participants also described digital media as a source of social capital. Many emphasized the importance of online networks, digital communication channels, and opportunities to connect with customers and collaborators. Digital technologies were frequently viewed as mechanisms for expanding opportunities beyond traditional geographic and social limitations (Davila, 2025, pp. 34–35).
The responses concerning entrepreneurship were especially revealing. Upward mobility emerged as a dominant theme. Participants frequently described business ownership as a pathway toward financial independence, flexibility, self-reliance, and economic stability. Several respondents indicated that barriers encountered within traditional labor markets contributed to their decision to pursue entrepreneurship (Davila, 2025, pp. 32–33).
Participants also discussed interactions with government agencies and disability-related support systems. These experiences reflected both opportunities and challenges associated with accessing entrepreneurial resources and support programs (Davila, 2025, pp. 32–33).
Persistent Barriers to Digital Participation
Despite the opportunities associated with digital media advertising, participants consistently identified significant barriers affecting their business activities.
Financial barriers emerged as one of the most frequently reported challenges. Several participants described difficulties obtaining sufficient resources to invest in advertising, marketing support, technological infrastructure, and business development activities. For many entrepreneurs, financial limitations constrained their ability to fully utilize digital advertising opportunities (Davila, 2025, pp. 35–36).
Participants also identified challenges associated with human labor and support resources. Some reported difficulties obtaining timely marketing assistance, while others described disability-related limitations that affected their ability to engage with digital systems under existing conditions (Davila, 2025, pp. 35–36).
These findings complicate assumptions that technological innovation automatically promotes equality. Access to technology alone does not eliminate structural inequalities. Meaningful participation depends upon the availability of financial resources, accessible systems, educational opportunities, human support, and institutional infrastructure.
Implications for the Digital Economy
The broader significance of this research extends beyond entrepreneurship. As governments, corporations, educational institutions, and service providers increasingly digitize essential functions, accessibility becomes increasingly important for participation in social and economic life.
The experiences described by participants challenge assumptions that technological innovation inevitably produces inclusion. Instead, the findings suggest that digital participation remains shaped by broader structural inequalities involving economics, institutional design, education, labor markets, and access to resources (Davila, 2025, pp. 25–26).
Consequently, accessibility should not be viewed as an optional enhancement or regulatory requirement imposed after development is complete. Accessibility should be recognized as a foundational design principle that promotes equitable participation from the outset.
Designing technologies that prioritize accessibility benefits not only disabled individuals but society as a whole. Inclusive systems expand opportunities, strengthen participation, and reduce barriers that unnecessarily limit human potential.
Conclusion
My research demonstrates that disability, entrepreneurship, and digital media are deeply interconnected within broader systems of power and inequality. Digital media advertising offers important opportunities for visibility, communication, and economic participation. At the same time, disabled entrepreneurs continue to encounter barriers associated with financial constraints, accessibility challenges, institutional structures, and unequal access to resources.
By combining interdisciplinary literature analysis with original survey research, this study contributes to ongoing discussions concerning disability justice, entrepreneurship, digital participation, and equitable access. Most importantly, it centers the experiences of disabled entrepreneurs themselves, highlighting both the opportunities and limitations that characterize participation in the contemporary digital economy.
Technology alone cannot eliminate inequality. Meaningful inclusion requires intentional design, equitable access, and sustained commitments to accessibility. As digital systems continue to shape economic and social life, these considerations will remain essential to building a more inclusive future.
Reference
Davila, M. A. (2025). How do disabled entrepreneurs understand and use digital media to advertise their businesses? CUNY School of Labor and Urban Studies. https://daar.llc/research-protocols/
Recent Comments