MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2097092396 · doi:10.1177/016344301023001001

The media and democratization in Africa: contributions, constraints and concerns of the private press

2001· article· en· W2097092396 on OpenAlexaff
Wisdom J. Tettey

Bibliographic record

VenueMedia Culture & Society · 2001
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Calgary
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocratizationFourth EstateDemocracyPolitical scienceDemocratic consolidationPoliticsPolitical economyAccountabilityCorporate governanceFreedom of the pressRealmSociologyLawEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The article argues that the private media in Africa are contributing in significant ways towards democratic governance and accountability on the part of state officials. However, in spite of the remarkable progress made in media proliferation and diversity over the last few years, there still remain troubling concerns. Political space for the unfettered operation of the media continues to be non-existent in many so-called `democratic' countries. It is also contended that the private media themselves cannot be exculpated from the damage that is being done to the fourth estate of the realm as a legitimate and formidable force in the efforts towards democratic progress and consolidation. There has to be some introspection and change in the private media's patterns of operation, if they are not to self-destruct. An informed and responsible citizenry is important for the operation of free media, thereby making it imperative that the media incorporate the hitherto peripheralized elements of society into the democratic discourse.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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 score0.020
Threshold uncertainty score0.040

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.005
Science and technology studies0.0080.018
Scholarly communication0.0200.014
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.000

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 head0.019
GPT teacher head0.263
Teacher spread0.244 · 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

Citations84
Published2001
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMedia Culture & SocietySame topicAfrican history and culture studiesFrench-language works237,207