MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2080757707 · doi:10.1353/chq.2007.0039

J. M. Barrie Gets the Miramax Treatment: Finding (and Marketing) Neverland

2007· article· en· W2080757707 on OpenAlex
Jennifer Geer

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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren's Literature Association quarterly · 2007
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Gender, and Advertising
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsReinterpretationSpectacleAdvertisingKey (lock)ArtSociologyAestheticsMarketingPsychologyBusinessPolitical scienceComputer scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article uses the DVD material for the Miramax film Finding Neverland to explore the marketing of children's films. Miramax is a subsidiary of Disney, and Finding Neverland's DVD marketing aligns it with Disney's brand image. The main DVD featurette reinterprets Finding Neverland and its stars according to an unspoken template: child-centered fantastic spectacle that supports wish-fulfillment and firmly excludes death or unhappiness. The template fits clumsily, yet such blatant reinterpretation inadvertently reveals key features of Disney/Miramax's marketing strategies for family films. More broadly, this case study suggests scholars should take corporate brand identities and synergistic business models into account when examining the conception and marketing of children's films.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.464
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.008
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.258 · 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