MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Racist disinformation on the World Wide Web: initial implications for the LIS community

2000· article· en· W2049032469 on OpenAlex

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.

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Australian Library Journal · 2000
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsOffice of the Chief Medical Examiner
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDisinformationThe InternetRacismPornographyCensorshipTerminologyInternet privacyWorld Wide WebSociologyPolitical scienceMedia studiesPublic relationsComputer scienceSocial mediaLawLinguistics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper has emerged from an Australian-based doctoral research program investigating the presence of racist disinformation on the World Wide Web (WWW) and the extent to which, if any, such material can be balanced by the content of anti-racist sites. Prior research about racism on the internet has rarely dealt specifically with the World Wide Web. Much of what has been written has focused on pornography in the censorship/free speech debate, with racism treated as an adjunct. Whereas previous researchers have raised the potential of the internet as a source of disinformation, there has been little in the way of specific studies of racist disinformation on the World Wide Web. This paper addresses a number of issues emerging from the relevant literatures and clarifies important points of terminology. Finally it considers possible implications for the role of the LIS community as use of the World Wide Web by racist groups increases (Institute of Race Relations 1999).

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.615
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0060.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.108
GPT teacher head0.375
Teacher spread0.268 · 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