Subscribing to publicity: Syndicated newspaper features for moviegoing in North America, 1911–15
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article charts how movies were integrated into the existing popular print culture of weekend newspapers in North America between 1911 and 1915. Neither the movie theatre nor the newspaper should be given priority as the primary site of cinema culture. The practice of reading a newspaper’s film page would be incomplete without a trip to join the mass audience at a movie theatre; conversely, a moviegoer’s pleasure could be whetted by the print supplement. Early, isolated experiments in metropolitan newspapers led to syndicates offering film pages for reproduction in small town papers. With the proliferation of moving picture publicity in newspapers throughout 1913, film studios began to collaborate with newspaper syndicates on a continental scale. Movie stories appeared in daily and weekly forms in various newspapers chains, well beyond the familiar ‘serial queen’ fiction tie-in. A subscription to the newspaper could become a commitment to engage with the mass market for movies. Insofar as a public is constituted through publicity, audiences are conjoined to readerships through the periodic call to participate in mass leisure with other readers.
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 | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".