MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2124625328 · doi:10.3917/sestr.hs1.0067

Ethique des journalistes : des règles strictes, des professionnels seuls

2010· article· fr· W2124625328 on OpenAlexaff
Pascal Junghans

Bibliographic record

VenueSécurité et stratégie · 2010
Typearticle
Languagefr
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEducation, sociology, and vocational training
Canadian institutionsWorld Federation of Science Journalists
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHumanitiesPolitical sciencePhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Bien souvent à l’origine de révélations tonitruantes, notamment dans le domaine de la sécurité, les journalistes sont régulièrement interpellés sur leur respect d’une éthique journalistique dont les caractéristiques demeurent insaisissables. Pascal Junghans, journaliste à La Tribune, témoigne ici avec un regard de praticien sur les enjeux éthiques de la profession. Si des lois et des chartes encadrent strictement cette dernière, in fine, les choix du journaliste sont davantage guidés par sa conscience individuelle. Mais l’éthique personnelle suffit-elle pour autant à encadrer le métier de journaliste ?

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)0.023
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.041
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.119

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0230.041
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.003
Science and technology studies0.0130.027
Scholarly communication0.0170.012
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0040.006
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.003

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 head0.295
GPT teacher head0.493
Teacher spread0.199 · 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 designNot applicable
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

Citations0
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSécurité et stratégieSame topicEducation, sociology, and vocational trainingFrench-language works237,207