MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2188757634

User-generated video and the online public sphere: Will YouTube facilitate digital freedom of expression in Atlantic Canada?

2008· article· en· W2188757634 on OpenAlex
Mary Milliken, Kerri Gibson

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.

venuePublished in a venue whose home country is Canada.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueNPARC · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsUploadOnline videoThe InternetInternet privacyPublic sphereComputer scienceMultimediaWorld Wide WebSocial mediaDemocracyPolitical scienceLawPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Democracy relies on freedom of expression and the opportunity for citizens to exchange views and form public opinion about issues of social concern. User-generated online video (UGOV) has allowed hundreds of thousands of audiovisual content creators and gatherers to upload clips and video blogs to video portal sites such as YouTube, where they can be accessed by anyone with adequate computer hardware, software and Internet bandwidth. Video-posters and viewers can communicate through textual and video commentaries as well as video rating systems. To assess the opportunities and limitations on the freedom offered by this new type of expression, our study surveyed YouTube users in Atlantic Canada as well as Atlantic Canadian UGOVs on YouTube to assess whether and how UGOV is contributing to the online public sphere.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.707
Threshold uncertainty score0.518

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.032
GPT teacher head0.250
Teacher spread0.218 · 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