Industry versus democracy: the new Audiovisual Media Services Directive as a site of ideological struggle
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article explores the new Audiovisual Media Services Directive which will be the main instrument of media regulation in the European Union for the next years. However, instead of analyzing the directive itself which entered into force in December 2007 I am interested in its history. I will focus on 2 years of intense deliberation among EU institutions that preceded the final directive. A discourse analysis highlights the conflicting rationales that two EU institutions, the European Parliament and the European Commission, use in their respective drafts of the directive. The central point of reference in the Commission's draft is the Single Market, with Europeans being addressed as consumers. In contrast, at the heart of the Parliament's concept of media regulation is a European public sphere composed of European citizens. My analysis illustrates how, in the process of drafting and redrafting the law text, the Parliament's emphasis on the media's role for democracy is considerably stripped down.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.033 | 0.028 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.017 | 0.056 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.032 | 0.021 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.015 |
| Research integrity | 0.015 | 0.018 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".