Bibliographic record
Abstract
Since the early 1980s, AIDS activists have developed their own alternative media projects in order to mobilize those infected and affected, challenge misconceptions regarding the disease, provide practical and useful information, and transform power structures which inhibit an effective response to the HIV/AIDS pandemic. In this article I examine several challenges for AIDS media activists arising from an expanded institutional response to the HIV/AIDS epidemic. First is the challenge posed by pressures to professionalize media projects for people with HIV/AIDS. The second challenge is the need to adapt the role of media projects as providers of information in relation to those institutional resources that are available to people with HIV/AIDS. Third is the challenge of overcoming the marginality of alternative media projects in order to effectively reach out to and inform people with HIV/AIDS and in order to continue to work toward transforming the meaning of HIV/AIDS. To conclude, I address the relevancy of AIDS specific struggles with institutionalization for media activism more broadly. This analysis provides insight into the dialectic between activists using media to challenge and transform the meaning of social problems and institutional forces of incorporation and containment exercised by the state, medicine, and the mass media.
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 | 0.027 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.054 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.027 | 0.018 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.020 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".