MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

A Malaysia–United States free trade agreement: Malaysian media and domestic resistance

2009· article· en· W2119573249 on OpenAlexaff
Sandra Smeltzer

Bibliographic record

VenueAsia Pacific Viewpoint · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocioeconomic Development in Asia
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersEuropean Commission
KeywordsNegotiationTransparency (behavior)MainstreamDissentPolitical scienceGovernment procurementSovereigntyGovernment (linguistics)EnforcementCivil societyIntellectual propertyResistance (ecology)Trade agreementInternational tradeBusinessLawProcurementPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract This article examines Malaysia's civil society resistance to a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) with the United States, focusing specifically on the role played by domestic mainstream and alternative media in raising awareness of trade negotiations. While challenges to a Malaysia–United States FTA may appear muted – especially if compared with the outpouring of dissent witnessed on the streets of Thailand and South Korea against similar deals with the United States – Malaysia's civil society agents have employed a range of mechanisms to oppose the agreement. Although these activists have focused their efforts on different sections of the proposed FTA – from intellectual property rights to food sovereignty to government procurement procedures – all share a common call for greater transparency in the negotiation process and greater public and parliamentary consultation. This article takes a critical look at who is involved in these resistance efforts, their key issues of concern, limitations to their success, and, most importantly, their relationship with and use of local media.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.007
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.009
Threshold uncertainty score0.028

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.007
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0050.007
Scholarly communication0.0090.004
Open science0.0000.003
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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 head0.014
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.250 · 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

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAsia Pacific ViewpointSame topicSocioeconomic Development in AsiaFrench-language works237,207