How Does Newspaper Coverage of Collective Action Vary?
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
Newspapers are a widely used source of data about collective action and social movements. In this study, we build upon a growing body of literature that critically assesses the coverage that newspapers provide of protest. We consider coverage in relation to a set of protest events that have yet to be considered in the literature (protest by Indigenous people in Canada); we consider multiple years (1985 and 1995); and finally, we measure coverage differently than has been done in previous studies (multiple articles and type of coverage as opposed to yes/no assessments). Using data on forty-three protest events, covered in seven Canadian newspapers, we find that while some events are covered by a similar number of newspapers, the volume of articles and type of coverage can be very different. We also find that for most newspapers, coverage rates improved over time. Scholars must be careful to assess whether increases in protest are real or merely reflect increases in coverage.
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 | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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