Whose Identity Is It Anyway? Consumer Representation in the Age of Database Marketing
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In the information-intensive marketplaces of the networked economy, database-related marketing techniques have gained unprecedented popularity. Their development is based on the assumption that greater capturing of customer information in digital databases leads to epistemologically superior insights about the customer. The proliferation of customer databases, however, has triggered privacy concerns and has encouraged consumers to devise information externalization strategies to maintain control over their digital representation (identity) vis-à-vis companies. Drawing on poststructuralist theory, the authors argue that current consumer strategies are ineffective in maintaining control over one’s identity in the electronic marketplace because such strategies are based on an obsolete ontological distinction between material identity and digital representation. They suggest that in the age of database marketing, digital consumer representations in fact constitute the consumer. Therefore, only if consumers are given full access to companies’ customer databases can they maintain a sense of control over their identities in the marketplace.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| 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 it