MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1939379517 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2001v26n4a1252

Reality TV, Big Brother and Foucault

2001· article· en· W1939379517 on OpenAlexaffvenue
James Wong

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFoucault, Power, and Ethics
Canadian institutionsWilfrid Laurier University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPanopticonBrotherMetaphorModernityReality tvPower (physics)SociologyReading (process)AestheticsMichel foucaultGazeMedia studiesEpistemologyPhilosophyPsychoanalysisLawPsychologyPoliticsPolitical scienceAnthropologyTheology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Reality TV allows us to gaze at others. Some critics link such watching, along with the reliance on new communication technologies in contemporary culture, to Foucault's use of the panopticon metaphor in his analysis of modernity. Perhaps in watching we have become Big Brother ourselves. This paper argues that linking reality TV (and the idea of Big Brother) to Foucault's use of the panopticon metaphor is mistaken. For Foucault, surveillance is only half of the story in the metaphor. The other half is that we are the ones who are exercising power over ourselves. We are our own masters. The article sets out the implications of this reading of Foucault on recent debates in connection with the preoccupation with Big Brother in contemporary culture.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.047

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.063
Scholarly communication0.0060.011
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0060.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.088
GPT teacher head0.351
Teacher spread0.263 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2001
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicFoucault, Power, and EthicsFrench-language works237,207