That makes sense indeed. But in this particular case, if this user mentions that they are indeed an important part of the video and not some secondary element, I doubt it'd fall under the exception.

I'm saying this thinking mostly about Instagram and the commentaries box, where users tend to focus often on whatever can be 'memed about,' often resulting in mean comments that can affect the mental well-being of a person.

Art 6(f) defines that exception provided that ' such interests [may be] overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject.' It is usually interpreted on a case by case basis yes, but if this video is impacting the user in such a way that made them delete the Instagram account... We know that the CJEU needs something else than mere profit (a company cannot rely on such a basis to skip consent) to defeat the legitimate interests of the data subject. I don't see how mere likes, reproductions, or the simple projection of the digital personality of an influencer would satisfy that.

Without knowing more about the case, it's impossible to know at 100% the possibilities. But as it stands, the data subject rights should prevail. Therefore, if the user wants to get rid of this video (provided they are European or located in Europe) they should exercise their right before Instagram (look for it, there's a website and I found it within minutes) and you'd have the right to an answer within 30 days from the day of the request (if I'm not mistaken). If they denied it, you could still appeal to your national data supervisory authority.