MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2274348773 · doi:10.3138/ctr.165.010

Feminism as a Marketing Tool: Calgary’s Urban Curvz

2016· article· en· W2274348773 on OpenAlexvenueaboutno aff
Shelley Scott

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Theatre Review · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia, Gender, and Advertising
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeminismEvent (particle physics)AdvertisingSociologyFunkAssertivenessMedia studiesArtPsychologyGender studiesBusinessArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article begins with the question of whether and how theatres use the word feminism in their advertising and on their websites. I address Calgary’s Urban Curvz theatre company and their assertive use of the word, drawing on conversations with Lindsey Zess-Funk, Artistic Associate, and Jacqueline Russell, the company’s Artistic Director. Is the language of feminism attractive as a marketing strategy for professional theatre? The marketing choices of Urban Curvz—the images used, the language employed, the events hosted—can provide an alternative message to the cacophony of other theatres’ advertising campaigns, and can create an alternative intention for theatregoers in Calgary, but need to be handled carefully. Urban Curvz has made an impact through the growing profile of its Girls Gone Wilde! festival and other special events it sponsors, such as Take Back Halloween, an event held in 2014 that attracted significant media attention but also some negative feedback, as the intention to offer an alternative to the hypersexualization of Halloween costumes was misconstrued by some as “slut shaming.” This incident points to the challenges of articulating a feminist message.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.473
Threshold uncertainty score0.952

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.004
Science and technology studies0.0060.007
Scholarly communication0.0070.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.028
GPT teacher head0.296
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 designQualitative
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
Published2016
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Theatre ReviewSame topicMedia, Gender, and AdvertisingFrench-language works237,207