MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1603253838 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2009v34n3a2200

CCTV Surveillance and the Poverty of Media Discourse: A Content Analysis of Canadian Newspaper Coverage

2009· article· en· W1603253838 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperContent analysisPolitical scienceMedia coveragePovertyPublic opinionElectronic surveillanceConversationPublic relationsAdvertisingNews mediaSociologyMedia studiesBusinessPoliticsSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines newspaper coverage about closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance in Canada and considers its implications for public opinion and policymaking. The study addresses several issues, including the rise and fall of media attention to the themes that structure the news coverage and patterns of source access and the implications of these themes for how citizens understand the role of surveillance in their lives. As more Canadian cities explore using CCTV surveillance as a policing tool for monitoring public space, news coverage should strive to enhance the public conversation about surveillance. The data reported in this study show that the coverage has been a very poor resource for helping citizens and policymakers to understand the complex issues involved in the surveillance of public areas in Canada.

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 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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.698
Threshold uncertainty score0.318

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.037
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.259 · 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