Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study presents a news discourse analysis of a case in which the dominant political and ideological discourse of conflict and violence gave way to optimism and hopes for peace in Israel.It offers a profile of three types of discourse used by Israeli print news media in the context of 'peace' and 'war' in the immediate aftermath of the Oslo Accords signed on September 13, 1993.By this time, the Israeli media had already demonstrated a dramatic change in attitude and terminology: The familiar war discourse was rapidly being replaced by peace representations and peace images.The assumption of the study is that overuse of the term 'peace' at a time of revolutionary change in Israeli socio-political practice not only detracted from Israeli peace perspectives and beliefs, but also caused news discourses to deteriorate into war discourses.The purpose of the study was to uncover the role of the contextual system developed to communicate specific topics relating to 'peace' representations in news discourse and the negative socio-political consequences of the incompatibility of discourse types with actual political conditions at a given time.The findings suggest that inter-textual representations of 'war' and 'peace' led to a discourse type which imposed unwanted meanings upon itself.It also suggests that certain types of news discourse, such as reconciliation, peace and war reporting, may be important in establishing the proper relations between discourse, language, media and the meaning of peace because of the essential role that the mass media play, not only in war coverage, but, no less important, also in peace reporting.Ultimately, inappropriate discourse at a given time may lessen the chances of building trust among peoples and nations.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".