Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores perceptions of Internet access in UK public libraries within government policy, by librarians, and by library users, in the broader context of government/citizen intermediation. Predominantly theoretical, it focuses upon how discourses of self-education and empowerment have come to position Internet access within this domain in different ways. Public libraries are significant here because: (1) within policy circles, public libraries are positioned as key informational intermediaries between government and citizen; (2) they offer an opportunity to explore the role and experience of ‘traditional’ institutions incorporating Internet access (as opposed to ‘new’ institutions such as the cyber-café and e-gateway); and (3) perceptions of Internet access within public libraries have been under-explored within theoretically driven sociology. An illustrative case involving documentary analysis and interviews with librarians and library users is drawn on to question the technicist image of future domestic governance and citizenship in policy on access and intermediation. The article highlights emerging conjunctions and disjunctions between (1) government policy; (2) library-institutional discourses, interests and strategies; and (3) the everyday practices of citizens, in the context of such access. Utilizing theoretical insights from STS and cultural theory, the article stresses that ‘tensions’ between the different interested constituencies involved (government; libraries; library users) problematize any simple notions of a ‘unitary Internet’ and raise some theoretical and empirical questions regarding the current conceptualization of intermediation within policy on public Internet access.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.077 | 0.014 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".