MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

Media and Politics in New Democracies

2015· book· en· W2189380995 on OpenAlex

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.

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

VenueOxford University Press eBooks · 2015
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPopulism, Right-Wing Movements
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAutocracyPoliticsDemocracyPolitical sciencePolitical economyMedia studiesSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The number of comparative studies in the field of political communication increased considerably after Daniel Hallin and Paolo Mancini's publication of comparing Media systems. In this book, four dimensions are used to distinguish between the media environments in western countries around the year 2000: press market development, parallelism between parties and media outlets, state intervention in the realm of media, and levels of journalist professionalization. The authors conclude that in western Europe and North America three types of media systems coexisted: a polarized pluralist model (in southern Europe), a democratic corporatist model (in scandinavia and some western European countries), and a liberal model (Canada, USA, Ireland, and the UK). Within this framework, both Portugal and Spain are described as polarized pluralist media systems, given their weak press markets and low patterns of journalistic professionalization, as well as strong state intervention in the realm of media and parallelism between media outlets and political parties.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.902
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
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 head0.043
GPT teacher head0.258
Teacher spread0.215 · 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