MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2022945633 · doi:10.3138/cjccj.2011.e.32

“Gang” as Empty Signifier in Contemporary Canadian Newspapers

2012· article· en· W2022945633 on OpenAlex
Chris Richardson, Liam Kennedy

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Criminology and Criminal Justice/La Revue canadienne de criminologie et de justice pénale · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCrime, Deviance, and Social Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsExtortionNewspaperAmbiguityMeaning (existential)IdeologyContext (archaeology)PoliticsSociologyGlobeHegemonyCriminologyRelation (database)Media studiesTerrorismTerm (time)MainstreamLawPolitical scienceHistoryEpistemologyPsychologyLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The word gang appears frequently in newspapers. The meaning of this term, however, varies greatly depending on context. This study examines its different significations in the top-selling English-language newspapers in Canada. Taking almost 3,900 occurrences of the term and its variants (gangs, ganging, and ganged) in the Globe and Mail, the Toronto Star, the Vancouver Sun, and Montreal's Gazette, the authors analyse how journalists deploy the concept of gangs to describe diverse subjects from vandalism by teenagers to extortion by organized crime syndicates to terrorist plots by religious extremists as well as simply groups of friends or acquaintances with no criminal connections. Using Ernesto Laclau's concept of the empty signifier as the main theoretical framework, the authors argue that “gang” has been emptied of its meaning and, while its current uses are not necessarily indicative of conspiratorial or ideological strategies, this ambiguity risks being appropriated within hegemonic political discourses if not questioned and reassessed by journalists and readers. The authors conclude by suggesting ways to combat this problem of ambiguity and highlight the political implications that future researchers may explore in relation to mediated representations of crime.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Meta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.455
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.141
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.207 · 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