Campaigning and Digital Media in Alberta: Emerging Practices and Democratic Outcomes?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the use and impact of an array of established and emerging digital media on the 2008 Alberta provincial election. Based on data collected from a range of methods, we explore the application of digital media by candidates and political parties. In describing the extent to which various forms of digital media were employed as campaign tools, the article examines the role of digital media in overcoming the media access gap between the dominant political party and other oppositional and minor parties (democratization). As a source of comparison, data from the 2008 national election is employed. The article argues that the evidence supporting democratization is weak. Although there are indications that digital media is one area of campaigning that suffers from the lowest performance gap between different political parties and actors, we identify that structural, human and financial factors advantage the dominant parties' access to both conventional and digital media. This appears significant given the electoral success of the incumbent, and the continued decline in voter participation. The inability of digital media to reinvigorate Alberta democracy lies in other factors of which, we argue, politics is but one, historical, social and economic factors being significant as well.
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 | 0.045 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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".