Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract The concept of alternative/activist media encompasses a variety of practices and technologies that operate outside dominant media frameworks. These forms of media aim to bypass traditional gatekeeping mechanisms of powerful media industries to circulate independent content and counter-information, often with an emphasis on horizontal structure, grassroots origins, and participatory production. Alternative/activist media provide a platform for underrepresented voices, fostering cultural production and identity negotiation outside hegemonic structures. In 2017, Clemencia Rodríguez proposed the phrase “media at the margins” to divert the analytical focus from normative definitions to studying the particularities of media configurations, emphasizing the heterogeneous and context-dependent nature of their practices. This shift underscores the need to understand the socio-technical environments, power dynamics, and practices that shape alternative/activist media as well as the forms of agency, ontologies, and epistemologies that underpin them. Since the development of so-called Web 2.0, the boundaries between corporate and alternative media have become increasingly blurred, particularly on social media platforms. Whether alternative/activist media projects position themselves at the margins or center of the media assemblage they are part of, an analytical move away from definitional criteria toward composition is crucial to understand the dynamic processes that make media a site of resistance. The extent to which media can be considered alternative/activist often depends on the broader composition of its formation, including its socio-political positioning, political economy, operational ethos, and technical configuration. The configuration may also hinge on the specific audiences it seeks to engage and the degree to which it challenges dominant media narratives and power structures. Accordingly, emerging approaches that attend to processes of mediation and mediatization, especially of digital alternative media, highlight the importance of local media ecologies and the interconnectedness of media practices across time and space, contributing to a nuanced understanding of the role of alternative/activist media in social movements and political activism. Additionally, research in the fields of critical platform and data studies, decolonial studies, science and technology studies, anthropology, and Black and Indigenous studies provides tools to explore several areas that are key to understanding the alternative and/or activist character of specific media; the political role of media design and network architectures; the infrastructuralization of media platforms; and how these platforms shape power dynamics. Another important focus area is how media serves as a vehicle for subjectivation against neoliberal individualism and the dehumanizing effects of data extraction, forming activists and shaping new kinds of distributed, socio-technical agency. Finally, approaches that consider the ontological and epistemological underpinning of media and data activism are crucial to reveal how specific media practices are tied to alternative world-making, challenging mainstream and Western-centric perspectives on media’s role in knowledge production and a technopolitics of care for humans and the environment.
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 | 0,011 | 0,014 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,052 |
| Communication savante | 0,020 | 0,013 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,013 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 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 ».