Death under Control: The Portrayal of Death in Mass Print English Language Magazines in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The purpose of this article is to discuss the portrayal of death in modern North American society in the highest circulating English language magazines available in Canada and published either in the United States or in Canada, in 1991, 1996, and 2001. The prevailing underlying frame/discourse of which there were a number of sub-variants, was the notion of the control of death. Stories focused on people taking control of death by 1) passive and active euthanasia, 2) suicide with political and social motivations and messages, 3) suicide deaths among celebrities and the families of celebrities, 4) dramatic murders, 5) issues in the “right to die movement,” and 6) new techniques and technologies for life extension. There was a very small minority of articles on miscellaneous issues such as death rates and their variation across geographic region, social class, environmental condition, and cause. The article ends with discussion of the ways that this portrayal of death obfuscates the real lack of control most North Americans, particularly those who are poor or “racialized,” have over the timing, or circumstances of death. In addition, as a critical discourse analysis, it discusses the interests that are served by this perspective.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.015 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".