Press freedom and communication rights: What kind of journalism does democracy need?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The task of identifying appropriate models of journalism for Pacific Island nations as they strive for more democratic governance is not a straightforward one. This article summarises several contending models of democracy—market liberalism/competitive elitism, public sphere liberalism, and radical democracy—and their attendant expectations of news media. When measured against the stated ideals of press freedom, and notwithstanding the emergence of the internet, the existing news systems of the dominant Western liberal-democracies, notably the US and UK, have significant democratic shortcomings, in relation to ‘watchdog’, public sphere, community-building and communicative equality criteria. Accordingly, the author argues that the practices and concept of press freedom need to be expanded and supplemented by a broader understanding and implementation of communication rights, entailing legal and cultural forms that support the full participation of all segments of society in the social cycle of communication. Such a paradigm is especially appropriate for postcolonial countries dealing with issues of economic development and inter-ethnic conflict.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.039 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.005 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.028 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 0.002 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".