How do demographic factors, specifically race, impact broadband access and usage in redlined communities like Louisville, KY?
Neighborhoods with better historical redlining grades receive faster Internet speeds per dollar spent than those with worse grades.
“Mbps per dollar” measures how many megabits per second households receive for each dollar spent and is visualized using different shades of blue. The map reveals a clear geographic trend: eastern Louisville, where neighborhoods historically received A or B grades under the federal Home Owners’ Loan Corporation (HOLC) redlining system, tends to have higher Mbps per dollar. This indicates that residents in these areas enjoy faster and more affordable service. In contrast, western and southwestern neighborhoods, many of which were graded C or D, show significantly lower Mbps per dollar, suggesting that residents in these neighborhoods pay more for slower service.
This spatial disparity closely parallels historical patterns of racial and economic segregation. A-graded areas were historically white and affluent, while D-graded or redlined areas were home to predominantly Black, immigrant, or low-income populations. The fact that these historical grades still align with today’s differences in internet affordability and quality underscores how structural discrimination has not vanished, but evolved into new forms of exclusion, such as digital inequality. As Gorski argues, the digital divide does not exist alone —it is not a root problem, but a symptom of deeper systemic injustices rooted in power and privilege (148). The relations we see between redlining maps and broadband value reinforces his claim: access to digital infrastructure is shaped not simply by market forces, but by the historical geography of inequality.
Racial composition influences broadband access, with minority neighborhoods often experiencing lower subscription rate and slower speeds than white areas.
The dual map visualization compares broadband subscription rates and racial composition across Louisville neighborhoods. The top map uses a blue gradient to represent broadband subscription levels, with darker shades indicating higher rates. The bottom map depicts racial composition, ranging from light yellow (“least white”) to dark brown (“most white”). Together, these maps enable side-by-side spatial analysis of how internet access aligns with racial demographics. The maps reveal that western and southwestern neighborhoods—home to more non-white residents—tend to have lower broadband subscription rates, while central and northern, predominantly white areas show significantly higher access. As Li et al. found, even after controlling for income, broadband access in majority Black and Hispanic neighborhoods remains 10–15% lower than in majority White or Asian neighborhoods (Li et al. 206). This reinforces that race is always a defining factor in digital inequality, despite income being accounted for, with predominantly white neighborhoods generally benefiting from more reliable and accessible broadband service.
As the proportion of minority residents increases, broadband access tends to decline. This inverse relationship is accompanied by greater variability in access among more diverse areas, suggesting that digital inequality is especially complex in racially diverse neighborhoods. These patterns are not isolated incidents but part of a city-wide trend tied to race. They reflect broader systemic inequalities in the United States, where African American, Latina(o), and Native American communities are routinely left behind, while white populations are better positioned to benefit from a technology-driven society. The consistency between local disparities in Louisville and national trends highlights the need to examine the structural advantages present in predominantly white areas and the systemic barriers confronting racially diverse communities.
Further emphasizing this disparity, internet speed availability also varies with racial composition. Neighborhoods are grouped by the percentage of white residents and categorized by access to slow (<25 Mbps), medium (25–99 Mbps), fast (100+ Mbps), or extremely fast (≥200 Mbps) internet. The results are stark: nearly 30% of neighborhoods with less than 25% white residents only have access to substandard speeds, while over 95% of neighborhoods that are majority-white (above 75%) have at least medium-speed service. This reveals a systematic link between race and digital infrastructure, reinforcing the persistent racial inequities in internet quality and accessibility.