Introduction to the Special Issue on Communications, The Media and Policy in Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The complexity of the late-modern globalizing order has accelerated the erosion of time and space and has radically undermined the apparent solidities of borders, identities, and the social relations of production. Hybridity, fluidity, risk, and individuated self-reflexivity are among the concepts that social researchers everywhere have grasped in order to anchor their attempts to apprehend the eruptions and disruptions that condition phenomenologies of the present. Among the most affected social theories are those of communications. The informational and communicational order that was taken for granted even a generation ago has been supplanted by a complex of global networks, mobilities, and flows. Media analysis, which is an important subfield of communications, has undergone particular transformation. From Innis to Angus communications theory has been more than a rich product of Canadian scholarship; the lived experience of space and land, nature and technology has conditioned the very possibility of Canadian social theory. In this way, the emerging contributions to scholarship in politics and communications, profiled in this special issue, are able to take us beyond the postmodern claim that “all that is solid melts into air.” While called upon to innovate and re-examine our theoretical frameworks, chosen methodologies, and critical matters of empirical enquiry, we do so on the basis of established research traditions that suggest certain future directions as we attempt to think through media and communications in an increasingly global Canada.
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 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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".