Representations of Climate Change in Canadian National Print Media: The Banalization of Global Warming
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L'article ausculte des tendances longitudinales dans la couverture médiatique d'enjeux reliés aux changements climatiques au sein des journaux canadiens à distribution nationale. Nous constatons que cette couverture est devenu moins nuancée et davantage restreinte sur le plan thématique au fil du temps malgré le fait que les changements climatiques constituent aujourd'hui un enjeu scientifique et politique à polyvalence marquée. Bien que le contexte contemporain témoigne d'une intensité de couverture sans précédents, nous soutenons que les journaux canadiens à distribution nationale ont pris part d'un processus de «décontextualisation» des changements climatiques. Ainsi, nous notons un traitement infréquent de sujets reliés aux causes et impacts potentiels du phénomène ainsi qu'aux débats scientifiques pertinents. Simultanément, l'agencement superficielle de cet enjeu aux tiraillements politiques quotidiens et aux occurrences au sein du monde des d'affaires représente la tendance discursive dominante. This article examines longitudinal trends in media coverage of global climate change issues in Canada's national print media. While climate change is a multilayered scientific and political issue, we find that media coverage has become less nuanced and thematically narrower over time. Despite unprecedented levels of coverage in recent years, we argue that the Canadian national print media has been complicit in the “decontextualization” of climate change, whereby less attention is paid to issues of causation, scientific claims, and potential impacts, while more attention is granted to how climate change superficially intersects with everyday politicking and business issues.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.011 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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 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".