MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969350297 · doi:10.1177/1077699013519916

Book Review: <i>Two on Development Communication Saving the World: A Brief History of Communication for Development and Social Change</i> , by Emile G. McAnany and <i>Communication, Media and Development: Problems and Perspectives</i> , edited by Florencia Enghel and Karin Wilkins

2014· article· en· W1969350297 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Adina Schneeweis

Bibliographic record

VenueJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedia studiesContext (archaeology)SociologyDevelopment communicationCommunication studiesSocial changeSocial scienceHistoryPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Saving the World: A Brief of for Development and Social Change. Emile G. McAnany. Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 2012. 208 pp. $47.95 hbk, $25 pbk.Communication, Media and Development: Problems and Perspectives. Florencia Enghel and Karin Wilkins, eds. Nordicom Review 33 (September 2012, special issue).The book and the special issue of Nordicom Review are paired here because, beyond the coinciding year of publication, they contribute the articulation of the expansion of the field of development communication at its intersection with media and social change. Saving the World offers a historical overview of the discipline, while Communication, Media and Development takes on recent case studies theorize about the present status of the field. The meeting of these two publications, at least in this review, should point the growth of the discipline.Both are well written and edited, and clearly organized. Saving the World, authored by Emile G. McAnany, the former Walter E. Schmidt Professor of at Santa Clara University, belongs the History of Communication series edited by Robert McChesney and John Nerone. It documents the history of communication's role in social change, ascertains the present moment in this context, and offers a scheme for judging the successes and failures of such projects. The editors of Communication, Media and Development are Florencia Enghel, PhD, candidate at Karlstad University, Sweden, and Karin Wilkins, professor at the University of Texas, Austin. The two assembled an impressive group of authors feature in the special issue, which is a collaboration between the peer-reviewed journal for media and com- munication researchers in the Nordic countries, Nordicom Review, and the Swedish web magazine Glocal Times.Drawing from the author's professional experience with communication for devel- opment and social change, Saving the World starts from Daniel Lerner's 1958 primer on modernization (which, interestingly, is only referenced once in the Nordicom Review collection). It then acknowledges the early names of the field and examines the conceptualization of the discourse on communication for development and the UN and UNESCO's institutional assumptions and beliefs carried into practice (p. 45). The book then moves through the 1970s and early 1980s dependency phase, initiated in academic discussions and (very) gradually translated into policy, the participatory paradigm traced Brazilian Paulo Freire and his 1968 Pedagogy of the Oppressed, and it ends with the most recent paradigm shift toward social entrepreneurship.The book chooses specific case studies illustrate the historical stages, including rural Indian radio; educational television in American Samoa, El Salvador, and Mexico; Tanzanian farm forums; Brazilian, Ecuadorian, and Canadian literacy and media participatory projects; and the model of social entrepreneurship in sites such as an Indonesian news agency, the Ugandan village phone project, Indian technology training, and the human rights advocacy group Witness.A notable shortcoming in McAnany's narrative is the absence of context prior Lerner's initial theorizing, and even prior President Truman's 1949 proclamation to help developing countries modernize, which the author arbitrarily takes as starting point for the historicizing of the new field (p. 13). The colonial past is ignored in the book, despite the wealth of scholarship in a variety of disciplines that has traced colonial thinking the present. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.892
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.239 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations1
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournalism & Mass Communication QuarterlySame topicMedia Studies and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207