MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2005409396 · doi:10.4000/communication.4113

Les enjeux des discours de débat dans les médias

2005· article· fr· W2005409396 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Marcel Burger

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunication · 2005
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicLinguistics and Discourse Analysis
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesArtPhysicsPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Cet article porte sur un genre particulier de débats en vogue dans les médias électroniques : les débats-spectacle. Bien qu’ils affichent une prétention civique d’intérêt général, ces débats visent avant tout à divertir et à fidéliser des auditeurs et téléspectateurs considérés comme des consommateurs d’information. À ce titre, les débats-spectacle satisfont la visée commerciale des médias d’information qui prime de plus sur la visée civique consistant à faire réfléchir, voire à éduquer, des auditeurs et téléspectateurs considérés comme des citoyens. À partir d’une étude de cas emblématique du genre (l’émission télédiffusée française : Du fer dans les épinards), l’attention est portée sur les comportements et le discours de l’animateur vedette avec l’hypothèse que ceux-ci fonctionnent comme l’un des révélateurs du fonctionnement et de l’évolution des pratiques médiatiques de débats et de leurs enjeux.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.016
Threshold uncertainty score0.031

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.001
Science and technology studies0.0090.010
Scholarly communication0.0060.006
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0090.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.216 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2005
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunicationSame topicLinguistics and Discourse AnalysisFrench-language works237,207