Reality Television, The Hills and the Limits of the Immaterial Labour Thesis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper will examine the immaterial labour thesis as proposed by Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri through a case study of reality television production practices, specifically those of the MTV program, The Hills. Because immaterial labour is rooted in individual intelligence, affect, and social communicative capacities, Hardt and Negri contend that economic value in the form of labour power can no longer be adequately measured and quantified and that this immeasurability contains revolutionary potential. But, given the current global economic meltdown, and the persistent and very material suffering of people all over the globe, how legitimate and responsible are these claims? Drawing from interviews with reality television workers and the work of George Caffentzis, Massimo de Angelis, David Harvie and others, this paper will test the limits of the immaterial labour thesis, arguing that, rather than disappearing, capital continues to impose measurement systems to determine socially necessary labour time no matter how diffuse or social that labour might be, and that this imposition continues to produce the alienation and exploitation of many for the benefit of a few.
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 | 0.008 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.073 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.011 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.009 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".