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
This paper analyzes the paradoxical relationship that exists between social movements and the news media. The concept of framing is explored, particularly the ways in which social movements come to be contextually framed within the news media and the consequent impact on the social movement itself. In order to gain an understanding of the relationship between social movements and the news media, several literary frameworks were discussed. In studying thisphenomenon, coverage from an anti-poverty demonstration that took place on June 15, 2000 at Queen's Park in Toronto was utilized as a comparative case study. To gain a broader understanding of the ways in which the news media frame social movements, the coverage used was split between two popular news sources: the Toronto Star and the Globe and Mail. These sources were chosen due to their politically opposing orientations, and were analyzed at the level of both content analysis and discursive interpretation. The interpreted data reinforced central hypotheses concerning the political biases of the respective news sources, yet some discrepancies were noted. On the whole, it was found that the subjective framing of social movements within the news media often serve to impede or undermine the intents of the organizations.
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 | 0.006 | 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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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