Emotional Tone of Ontario Newspaper Articles on the Health Effects of Industrial Wind Turbines Before and After Policy Change
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 often a primary source of health information for the public about emerging technologies. Information in newspapers can amplify or attenuate readers' perceptions of health risk depending on how it is presented. Five geographically distinct wind energy installations in Ontario, Canada were identified, and newspapers published in their surrounding communities were systematically searched for articles on health effects from industrial wind turbines from May 2007 to April 2011. The authors retrieved 421 articles from 13 community, 2 provincial, and 2 national newspapers. To measure the emotional tone of the articles, the authors used a list of negative and positive words, informed from previous studies as well as from a random sample of newspaper articles included in this study. The majority of newspaper articles (64.6%, n = 272) emphasized negative rather than positive/neutral tone, with community newspapers publishing a higher proportion of negative articles than provincial or national newspapers, χ(2)(2) = 15.1, p < .001. Articles were more likely to be negative when published 2 years after compared with 2 years before provincial legislation to reduce dependence on fossil fuels (the Green Energy Act), χ(2)(3) = 9.7, p < .05. Repeated public exposure to negative newspaper content may heighten readers' health risk perceptions about wind energy.
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 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it