One Network or Two?: French-Language Programming on the Canadian Radio Broadcasting Commission, 1932–36
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Durant ses quatre années d'existence, la Commission canadienne de radiodiffusion ( CCR/CRBC ), premier diffuseur public de l'histoire du pays, est le théâtre d'un affrontement entre différentes conceptions de la radiodiffusion et du Canada lui-même. L'une des controverses les plus importantes concerne la place à donner à la programmation de langue française sur le réseau national. La question est finalement résolue par la création d'un réseau français distinct qui ne dessert que Québec et les régions limitrophes de l'Ontario et du Nouveau-Brunswick. Cet article soutient que la controverse au sujet de la programmation française a nui à l'établissement de la CCR comme institution culturelle nationale crédible et légitime. Il avance en outre que la férocité du débat révèle l'existence d'un large consensus quant à l'influence que peut exercer un organe public de diffusion sur la façon dont les Canadiens imaginent leur pays.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".