MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W2774109797

No Is Not Enough: Resisting Trump's Shock Politics and Winning the World We Need

2017· article· en· W2774109797 sur OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Howard A. Doughty

Notice bibliographique

Revue˜The œinnovation journal · 2017
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueMisinformation and Its Impacts
Établissements canadiensnon disponible
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésGeniusNewspaperPoliticsDoctrineMedia studiesCorporationSociologyLawHistoryPolitical scienceArt history
DOInon disponible

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Naomi Klein No Is Not Enough: Resisting Trump's Shock Politics and Winning World We Need. Toronto, Canada: Penguin Random House, 20171.Over past two decades, Naomi Klein has produced four books plus a collection of newspaper articles and other short pieces (Klein, 2002). I have reviewed two of books in The Innovation Journal. The first one, No Logo, was part of a review essay on books that demonized corporation in Vol. 6, No. 3 (2001). The second, The Shock Doctrine (2007) somehow slipped through my personal editorial cracks (read but not reviewed here or elsewhere), but a generally favourable review of third, This Changes Everything, appeared in these pages in Vol. 19, No 3 (2014). With No Is Not Enough, I am finally going for trifecta. Even covering three out of four, however, requires an explanation.Naomi Klein isn't an original or an especially profound thinker. Few such people make it to print, and fewer produce books that attract many readers or make a big impact on events of their days. Conveying extraordinary brilliance in conventional, accessible language is a talent that escapes most deep thinkers and writers of genius. Naomi Klein, however, does next best thing, and she does it rather well. She has sold a ton of books, is widely interviewed in all major media, contributes opinion pieces to widely diverse print and online journals, appears to have attracted a measurable constituency and, from at least one perspective, makes a fair amount of common sense. So, when I said she was neither an original nor a profound thinker, I intended no disrespect and, of course, Ms. Klein makes no such claims. She is and seems content to be a dedicated activist and a well-tuned popularizer. In fact, if people such as Marine Le Pen and Donald Trump hadn't so thoroughly discredited concept, I might even have referred to her as a populist. And I'd have meant it as a compliment.Why should readers of The Innovation Journal pay attention to her? The simple reason is that she raises some of most salient issues of our day and puts them in language that ordinary citizens can understand. Her main topics should be atop every government's agenda. If innovation is to contribute to public good, it must address issues such as vitality of democracy, fairness of public procedures, application of universal human rights, equity of economic arrangements and sustainability of planetary biosphere. Anything less is political distraction and an abrogation of our deepest moral and responsibilities. Others, of course, may do a better job of discussing any one of these pillars of modern civilization; but, few are her equal in provoking intelligent public consideration of them all. Moreover, Klein's personal journey through complexity and complementarity of issues she discusses is so open, so honest, occasionally so vulnerable but also and always so passionate, that it is hard not to follow along. Those who do so will almost certainly be amply rewarded.2.It took Naomi Klein almost a decade to bring together ideas she'd accumulated as a journalist and political activist and to condense them into her first three manageable volumes. It was certainly worth investment of time and effort. Permit me to rehearse her line of thought.No Logo was an attack on the brand bullies, multinational enterprises that exploited workers on periphery to sell commodities and merchandise to exploited middling and lower classes in centres of empire, or of what Kari Levitt (2002) called hinterland and metropolis in Silent Surrender, a splendid little book that once inspired social democratic and nationalist dissenters and still holds up well. In her initial enterprise, Klein gave a shout-out to ethical shareholders, culture jammers, street reclaimers, McUnion organizers, human rights hacktivists, school-logo fighters and Internet corporate watchdogs. …

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,003
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesÉtudes des sciences et des technologies, Communication savante
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: aucune
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: aucune
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,724
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,999

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0030,001
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0080,000
Communication savante0,0020,001
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,074
Tête enseignante GPT0,351
Écart entre enseignants0,277 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.

Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreEmpirique

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations0
Publié2017
Routes d'admission2
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revue˜The œinnovation journalMême sujetMisinformation and Its ImpactsTravaux en français237 207