MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2108518986

History/Popular Culture: A Review of Frost/Nixon, the Book and the Movie

2009· review· en· W2108518986 on OpenAlexaff
Janis Thiessen

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typereview
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Winnipeg
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPresidencyNothingWhite (mutation)HistoryFrost (temperature)ConvictionArt historyNovellaGreenwichLawPoliticsMedia studiesLiteratureArtSociologyPolitical sciencePhilosophyMeteorologyGeography
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The life of Richard Nixon continues to inspire historical debate, cultural reflection, and public caricature, long after his resignation from the presidency of the United States in August 1974. Fifteen years after his death, the release of more tapes and documents from the Nixon White House and of Frost/Nixon are but the latest instalments in the on-going assessment of his presidency and his life. Frost/Nixon is a movie based on the play of the same name by Peter Morgan, and purports to tell the story of the famous interviews of Nixon conducted in 1977 by British television personality David Frost. Morgan’s script was inspired by The Conviction of Richard Nixon: The Untold Story of the Frost/Nixon Interviews, written by James Reston, one of Frost’s researchers, as well as by Frost’s 1977 account, I Gave Them a Sword. Capitalizing on the popularity of the movie, Frost has released a sequel, Frost/Nixon: Behind the Scenes of the Nixon Interview. This book includes five portions of interview transcripts with Nixon discussing Watergate, the Huston Plan, Salvador Allende, the Vietnam War, and Henry Kissinger. Frost/Nixon the movie is remarkable in its ability to turn what is really nothing more than two talking heads into a gripping film. Frost/Nixon the book is more disappointing. Frost’s publisher claims the book, an account of the path to the 1977 broadcasts, is “nothing short of hilarious,” that its insights are

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.499
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.114
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.186 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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

Citations0
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRhetoric and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207