MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2110846451 · doi:10.1080/08941920.2015.1054569

Canadian News Media Coverage of Climate Change: Historical Trajectories, Dominant Frames, and International Comparisons

2015· article· en· W2110846451 on OpenAlex
Mark C. J. Stoddart, Randolph Haluza‐DeLay, David B. Tindall

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueSociety & Natural Resources · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicClimate Change Communication and Perception
Canadian institutionsUniversity of British ColumbiaThe King's UniversityMemorial University of Newfoundland
Fundersnot available
KeywordsClimate changeNewspaperPolitical scienceNews mediaRhetorical questionPoliticsGlobeGovernment (linguistics)Media coveragePeriod (music)GeographyMedia studiesSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

We examine climate change news coverage from 1997 to 2010 in two Canadian national newspapers: the Globe and Mail and the National Post. The following questions guide our analysis: Why did the volume of climate change coverage rise and fall during the period? Focusing on the key period of 2007–2008, what kinds of issue categories, thematic frames, and rhetorical frames dominate the news discourse? Canadian news coverage of climate change is characterized by a series of peaks and troughs, combined with an overall increase in coverage. The volume of coverage appears to be primarily driven by national and international political events, more than by changes to national or global carbon emissions, or by other ecological factors. The Canadian news discourse about climate change is dominated by themes of government responsibility, policymaking, policy measures for mitigation, and ways to mitigate climate change.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.878
Threshold uncertainty score0.698

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.243
GPT teacher head0.386
Teacher spread0.143 · 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