Existe-t-il un public de la publicité? Une actualisation de la notion de « public » en regard des usages en ligne autour de la publicité.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Advertainement, creation de contenu publicitaire par les consommateurs, blogues, concours et autres celebrations de la publicite, d’aucuns sont a meme de se demander s’il existe un public de la publicite. En regard des travaux sur la reception, et plus particulierement ceux concernant la constitution des publics (Sorlin 1992; Dayan 2000), nous proposons un regard sur la creativite publicitaire comme objet interpellant une nouvelle forme de recepteur de la publicite. D’abord en delimitant une typologie des usages en ligne autour de la publicite. Puis, a travers une campagne quebecoise, nous tenterons de voir sous quelle forme apparait ce « public » et le role que joue la creativite, comme objet percu, dans sa constitution. Nous arguons que, bien qu’un recepteur-public se constitue bien autour de ces usages, et que la creativite y contribue largement, nous ne sommes pas en presence de ce consommateur parfois heroise dans le nouveau paradigme de la communication marketing.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.034 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.019 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.002 |
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".