Engaging with and Arranging for Publics in Blog Genres
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we take a rhetorical approach to weblogs, examining two sets of blogs: blogs responding to a national literary event called Canada Reads and ‘homeless blogs.’ Taking up Miller and Shepherd’s proposal (2004) that the exigence of the blog is self cultivation and validation, we examine how such an exigence may be met, not through entering and building community, but engaging with and arranging for recognition in what Michael Warner calls ‘discursive publics’ (2002:121). By focusing on uptake (Freadman 2002) as a public dynamic, we suggest how features of the blog such as blog posts and ‘meta-generic’ commentary (Giltrow 2002:192) about antecedent genres may enable a blogger to legitimate the self as an integral part and perpetuator of publics: a blogger’s uptake both actualizes a public (declaring membership), and imagines it anew (envisioning subsequent uptakes).
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".