This paper asks whether deliberative processes that include under-represented groups also give them influence, or only presence. It argues that inclusion should be assessed through three linked concerns raised by the workshop call: how under-represented groups are defined, how deliberative arenas relate to formal institutions, and how procedures are designed to prevent exclusion. In hybrid settings, digital mediation can shape who is invited, seen, heard, and ultimately taken seriously. The paper develops a four-part framework—access, visibility, voice, and uptake—to show why formal openness does not necessarily produce democratic inclusion. It also connects deliberative democracy, epistemic injustice, and algorithmic mediation with work on synthetic reality, cognitive warfare, and digital governance. The practical implication is that hybrid deliberation should be designed as an institutional ecology, not just a discussion format.

--

deliberative democracy,under-represented groups,hybrid deliberation,procedural design,institutional linkage,digital governance

• Psychology - Social Sciences
• Sociology - Social Sciences
• Political Science - Social Sciences
• Social and Economic Geography - Social Sciences
• Other Social Sciences - Social Sciences
• Other Humanities - Humanities
• Anthropology - Social Sciences