Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this article we examine the recent debate over the continued role of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC) in airing National Hockey League (NHL) games on its iconic television show, Hockey Night in Canada (HNIC) . Specifically, we outline the heightened competition between the CBC and private networks for the most desirable sports rights in the context of the explosive growth of subscription television. We then review how the CBC was, in the face of this competition and to the surprise of many commentators, able to secure a new contract with the NHL in 2006. We argue here that, while Canada's public network will never again have the place in Canadian life that it had in the early days of television (Rutherford, 1990), HNIC remains an important investment because it acts as a critical promotional platform for the public network, as well as providing a sizeable revenue stream that subsidizes the network's other programming. We will also argue that providing free-to-air broadcasts of the sport that matters most to Canadians is an issue of cultural citizenship, and thus an important part of the mandate of a public broadcaster, and a matter of national interest.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".