MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4242545855 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2003v28n4a1398

MediaThink

2003· article· en· W4242545855 sur OpenAlexaffvenueabout
James S. McLean

Notice bibliographique

RevueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2003
Typearticle
Langueen
DomaineSocial Sciences
ThématiqueMedia Studies and Communication
Établissements canadiensConcordia University
Organismes subventionnairesnon disponible
Mots-clésBusiness

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

As author James Winter explains, MediaThink is "the second in a trilogy of books" (the third has yet to be written) that purport to examine how and why the corporate media lie to us.It is Winter's view that documenting the orthodox bias of big media companies will reveal that they are little more than propaganda machines set on promoting and protecting the agenda of Canada's capitalist elite.MediaThink is meant to be a scholarly work that positions itself as a much-needed voice of contention, a watchdog that reveals and challenges the "increasingly myopic and orthodox picture" of the world perpetrated and perpetuated by "media owners, managers and workers" (p.xxvii).Winter seeks to place himself within the scholar/activist tradition of Noam Chomsky and Michael Parenti, both of whom he quotes extensively.Like Chomsky and Parenti, the author sees media corporations as self-interested conservative entities that do not operate in the public good.MediaThink is an accessible, often withering critique in which Winter takes the now familiar position-articulated more than two decades ago by, among others, Stuart Hall and Ian Connell-that the corporate mass media lie because they are intimately involved in the promotion and support of political ideologies and special interests that support media business interests.In other words, the corporate media use their considerable ability to influence public opinion to keep themselves and their like-minded friends in power.To support his argument, Winter has selected five case studies in which, in his view, the influence of "mediathink" is glaringly obvious: "To Win Their Hearts and Minds" deals with Indonesian atrocities in East Timor; "Feminism Did It" analyzes anti-feminism in the media; "The Nuclear Desert" dissects the war in Kosovo; "Nellie McClung Rolls Over" is concerned with media coverage of a sexual assault case; and "Just Desserts" deals with racism.The author analyzes the media coverage of these cases, examining the content of reports, columns, documentaries, and editorials to uncover the manner in which the corporate agenda is promoted through intentional bias.It is Winter's position that Canada's corporate media are not just thoroughly self-interested; they are sexist and racist in a profoundly reactionary sense.Having set the stage for a definitive and scathing denunciation of Canada's corporate media, and having promised to reveal how the media lie in order to influence public opinion and government policy, James Winter is simply unable to prove his case.There are serious problems with his methodology.In short, Winter cherry-picks material that supports his position.His documentation is culled overwhelmingly from newspaper sources, chiefly the Toronto Star, the National Post, and the Globe and Mail.With one notable exception, the influence of television on the news and information agenda is all but overlooked.There is virtually no mention of radio, particularly CBC Radio, which, for a significant number of Canadians, is a credible source of information and analysis.Aside from a passing reference to the Québec sovereignty movement, no mention is made of the views expressed by the French-speaking Canadian media.In two of the five case studies, Winter's views are predicated almost exclusively on a critique of coverage in the National Post.Since former owner Conrad Black created the National Post as a platform for Canadian right-wing views, it would be expected that the newspaper would take a conservative position on matters of public concern.This is the case, for example, in the chapter titled "Nellie McClung Rolls Over," in which Winter critiques the Post's defence of an Alberta judge who issued a controversial ruling in a sexual assault case (the now-famous Ewanchuk case in which the Supreme Court overturned the judge's decision).Throughout his critique, however, Winter makes no reference to how the case was covered by the Globe and Mail, Le Devoir, the Toronto Star, La Presse, CTV, Global Television, or the CBC.This gravely

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 enseignants

Ni 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.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,008
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,030
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Autre · Signal consensuel: Autre
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,063
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,000

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0080,030
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0010,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0030,003
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0070,008
Communication savante0,0180,010
Science ouverte0,0010,005
Intégrité de la recherche0,0040,005
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0630,018

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 Opus0,037
Tête enseignante GPT0,298
Écart entre enseignants0,261 · 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreAutre

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
Publié2003
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueCanadian Journal of CommunicationMême sujetMedia Studies and CommunicationTravaux en français237 207