Digital journalism is frequently presented as an emancipatory alternative to legacy media, yet Wilson and Costanza-Chock argue that the Internet does not abolish racialised exclusion; it reconfigures it through unequal ownership, employment, broadband access and visibility within networked publics . Their analysis insists that the ability of communities of colour to tell their own stories is not a peripheral matter of representation but a democratic condition, since media institutions shape whose experiences become intelligible, whose grievances gain legitimacy and whose knowledge circulates as public truth. The chapter demonstrates that people of colour remain underrepresented across newspapers, commercial broadcasting, public broadcasting and online journalism, while the apparent openness of blogs, digital platforms and participatory media is constrained by persistent inequalities in resources, recruitment, infrastructure and recognition. The Wilson–Tongia formulation offers a particularly incisive case study: as networks expand beyond half the population, exclusion becomes increasingly punitive because connectivity shifts from optional advantage to civic necessity. The chart on page 24 reinforces this argument by showing broadband access stratified by income and race, with White and Asian households enjoying substantially higher home broadband use than Black, Hispanic and American Indian households. Consequently, digital democracy cannot be secured by technological proliferation alone; it requires structural transformation in media ownership, newsroom labour, broadband policy and representational authority, so that networked communication becomes not merely accessible in theory but materially inclusive in practice.