MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1545797815 · doi:10.4000/communication.2619

Mark FINNEY (2010), Knowing is Half the Battle. How Endorsements for War were Embedded in CNN’s Coverage of the Conflict with Iraq

2012· article· en· W1545797815 on OpenAlexaffvenue
Aimé-Jules Bizimana

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en Outaouais
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesBattleArmed conflictPolitical scienceArtHistoryAncient historyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Dans cet ouvrage consacré à la couverture médiatique de la guerre en Irak, Mark Finney examine plus précisément le rôle de la chaîne de télévision CNN. Il propose une double perspective à la fois conceptuelle et méthodologique avec, d’une part, les études sur le conflit et la sociologie du journalisme et, d’autre part, les démarches quantitative et qualitative. La couverture que CNN a effectuée sur la guerre en Irak est analysée sous l’angle général du rôle du journalisme, surtout télévisé, ...

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.891
Threshold uncertainty score0.453

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.053
GPT teacher head0.298
Teacher spread0.244 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunicationSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207