Reproducing Colonialism: Subject Formation and Talk Radio in English Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract. This paper examines how two talk radio programs—CBC's Sounds Like Canada and Corus Radio Network's Adler Online —work to reproduce colonialism in Canada through formation of colonial subjectivity. It proceeds through analysis of listener experience informed by postcolonial theory, and the work of Deleuze and Guattari. The mobilization of affective states by these programs, specifically sympathy and outrage, has important implications for how colonialism continues to dictate many of the terms of Canadian political discourse. If colonialism continues to be reproduced in our daily interactions with the media, this poses serious threats to Canadian multiculturalism and to the potential for realizing Aboriginal political goals. Résumé. Cet article explore la manière dont deux émissions-débats radiophoniques ( Sounds Like Canada de CBC ainsi que Adler Online du réseau Corus Radio) participent à la reproduction du colonialisme au Canada en renforçant la formation d'une subjectivité coloniale. Cette recherche propose une analyse de l'expérience d'un auditeur développée conjointement avec les théories postcoloniales et les oeuvres de Deleuze et Guattari. La mobilisation d'états affectifs, plus précisément la sympathie ou l'indignation, qu'engendre l'écoute de ces émissions-débats a de nombreuses implications sur la façon dont le colonialisme continue de dicter plusieurs éléments clés du discours politique canadien. La perpétuation du colonialisme au cours de nos interactions quotidiennes avec les médias pose un risque non négligeable pour le multiculturalisme canadien et pour l'atteinte éventuelle des objectifs politiques des communautés autochtones.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".