What exactly would be disrespectful about it? Wood, paper, liquid crystal, it is only a medium.
Regarding digital images on a computer screen, or stored on a hard drive: such images are not "made of matter" as a printed or painted icon is. It is when the image is printed and therefore "made substantial", that it can be venerated as an icon. The common custom also is that any completed icon, painted or printed, mounted or framed, is blessed by a priest on the church altar, then it is ready for veneration.
Perhaps the most strident argument against the veneration of icons used by the iconoclasts was that of "worshipping matter", i.e. venerating things made of wood, paint, stone, or other earthly materials was idolatry. Of course, the iconoclasts were quite mistaken, as they missed the point that humble, fallen, earthly substances were sanctified through the incarnation of Christ. We do not worship the wood or paint, nor the paper and ink, but we venerate what (or who) is represented on the icon. The material, tangible nature of icons reflect the immaterial God becoming material, tangible flesh. A JPEG file on a hard drive or an image in a digital picture frame or computer screen is immaterial, a mere shadow.
