MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077305463 · doi:10.3138/chr.1739

A “Golden Age” of CBC Television News for the Military, 1952–1956

2013· article· en· W2077305463 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Mallory Schwartz

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Historical Review · 2013
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Identity and History
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMilitary servicePolitical scienceBroadcasting (networking)CorporationFormative assessmentService (business)Cold warAdvertisingLawSociologyBusinessPoliticsMarketing

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract: The military received significant coverage on the earliest television news broadcasts in Canada. There were reports and features about the wars Canadians fought in Korea and were preparing to fight against the Soviets in the early years of the Cold War. A close examination of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's television (cbc-tv) news coverage between 1952 and 1956 of topics ranging from the return of troops from Korea to combat training in Petawawa, Ontario, offers insight, not only into early television representations of military endeavours, but also into a formative period in cbc-tv's development. The article argues that, during the first years of transmission, cbc-tv news programs were largely uncritical and often supportive of the military. As a result, the national broadcaster reinforced the consensus on defence policy and military commitments. This did not reflect deficiencies in the cbc National News Service's journalistic ethics, but rather production contexts unique to the early 1950s: technological constraints; limited resources; strict military regulations; the cbc's established practices, policies, and program formats; the lack of debate about defence during the early Cold War; and the influence of American broadcasters, military newsfilm services, and foreign newsreel agencies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.071
Threshold uncertainty score0.516

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0090.020
Science and technology studies0.0060.005
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0080.001

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 head0.033
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.230 · 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

Citations2
Published2013
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Historical ReviewSame topicCanadian Identity and HistoryFrench-language works237,207