Contemporary Canadian Military/Media Relations: Embedded Reporting During the Afghanistan War
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
News reporters have been sporadically attached to military units as far back as the Franco-Prussian War of 1870, but the U.S. implemented the first official and large-scale embedded program in 2003 during the Iraq War.The Canadian Forces Media Embedding Program (CFMEP) was officially implemented in 2006 during the Afghanistan War.While considerable research has been carried out on the U.S. and British embed programs and their impact on media coverage, there has been very little academic study of Canada's CFMEP, or its impact on media coverage of the Afghanistan War.This work seeks to investigate Canadian military/media relations throughout a period of roughly 10 years during Canada's mission in Afghanistan.In doing so, it will examine how official procedures governing media coverage -particularly embedding policy -gave shape to the war reporting received by Canadians.First, within the broader subject area of military/media relations, this study establishes the origins of embedded reporting, and Canada's reasons for becoming involved in the Afghanistan War.Second, it weaves together academic, official (both military and government), and journalist perspectives regarding the practice and effects of embedded reporting on Canadian war reporting during the Afghanistan mission.Third, it analyzes coverage by four major media organizations of Canada's participation in the Afghanistan War during a 10-year period: from its initial military contributions in 2001 through to the end of troop deployment in 2011.It is the latter two components that fill a research void.i Results indicate first, continued concern with, and debate regarding, the concept of media objectivity; second, very high discontent among government officials with embedded media coverage of diplomatic and humanitarian efforts during the Afghanistan mission; third, largely untapped benefits of dis-embedded reporting, a unique component of the CFMEP in comparison to other countries' embed programs; and fourth, a discernible impact of framing due to the fundamental configuration of a military-hosted and maintained embed program.It is primarily within the last three sets of findings that we can see the structural influence of an embed policy negotiated by two disparate cultures, the military and the media, on media coverage.The major result of an accord between the imperatives and constraints of the news media and those of the military was an overwhelming focus on the military -to the exclusion of diplomatic and humanitarian efforts -and more specifically military excursions, injuries, deaths, and ramp ceremonies.Several future policy considerations are offered later in the study, including a call for media organizations to conduct post-war debriefing sessions for embedded reporters on lessons learned.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,017 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,038 | 0,011 |
| Communication savante | 0,013 | 0,004 |
| Science ouverte | 0,003 | 0,005 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,014 | 0,001 |
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.
score_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 découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».