Re-Pressing Racism: The Denial of Racism in the Canadian Press
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
A long-standing and pervasive element of Canadian national identity is the idealization of Canadian society as uniquely tolerant and free of racism. This national myth was seriously challenged when the results of a federally commissioned survey on attitudes toward immigration were made public. Using the methods of critical discourse analysis, this paper examines how the results of this survey were presented and interpreted in The Globe and Mail. Specifically, the press reports are examined with respect to: (a) how the situation of discrimination and intolerance revealed in the survey is encoded, (b) the meaning of the terms “Canadian” and “Canadian culture” in the context of these texts, and (c) how the texts account for the reported change in “Canadian” attitudes towards “visible minorities.” I argue that The Globe and Mail adopted an overall semantic strategy of denial of racism which reinterprets, marginalizes, and mitigates evidence of racism in Canada, and thus reinforces the dominant and preferred view of Canadian society as tolerant, pluralistic, and free of systemic racism.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 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