Insiders and Outsiders: Presentation of Self on Canadian Parliamentary Websites and Newsletters
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract An ongoing theme in the study of elected representatives is how they present themselves to their constituents in order to enhance their re‐election prospects, but there are few examples of studies exploring how elected officials present themselves online. This paper addresses this gap by comparing presentation of self by Canadian Members of Parliament (MPs) on parliamentary websites and in the older medium of parliamentary newsletters. It follows Gulati (2004; The International Journal of Press/Politics 9: 22–40) in using nameplate images of MPs in Parliament and their constituencies as proxies for presentations of self as insiders and outsiders, respectively. Specifically, it asks (1) how MPs present themselves online, (2) whether this differs from presentation in newsletters, and (3) what factors explain presentation of self online. The paper finds that MPs are likely to present themselves as outsiders on their websites, that this differs from patterns observed in newsletters, and that party affiliation plays an important role in shaping self‐presentation online. The implications of these findings and avenues for future research are discussed.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it