MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2289117530 · doi:10.14288/1.0055657

Policy provisions for public access to television : democratic and educational implications in Canada and the United States

2008· article· en· W2289117530 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Sousan Arafeh

Bibliographic record

VenuecIRcle (University of British Columbia) · 2008
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicMedia and Digital Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPolitical scienceDemocracyPublic administrationLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis examines broadcast policies and policy documents in Canada and the United States to determine whether and to what degree they make provision for the public's access to television. Government policies and policy documents are examined at the federal and local level, and a case study of two cable systems, one in Vancouver, B.C. the other in Seattle, Washington, supplies empirical data to corroborate how policy provisions for public access to television are interpreted and implemented. A neo-Gramscian concept of ideological hegemony broadly frames this study of the impact of public policy, specifically broadcast policy, on social structure and behaviour. Because a very small portion of the general population have access to television production and programming, they dominate the television discourse. Research that documents television’s pervasive stereotypic and derogatory treatment of women and “racial"/ethnic "minorities" as well as its perceived effect of contributing to the social and economic subordination of these populations in North American society is used as a basis for this study. This thesis argues that broadening the body of people who have access to the television production and programming process might encourage more accurate, positive and/or relevant television images and relations with positive social consequences. On one level, this is a matter of having broadcast policies which ensure such broadened access. Canada and the United States each have policy provisions for the general public's access to television which are based on notions of civic democratic participation in society. Analysis and comparison of these policies results in the conclusion that although both countries provide access to the public through policy, many of these provisions limit access in four areas: access to production, access to distribution, access to input, and access to viewing. Because television access policies limit the public's access increasingly, the broadening of the access base is impeded along with the challenge to the current structure, message and function of television. On this account, traditional agendas and images continue to dominate the airwaves and their educational power. Further study should be undertaken on: 1) the effects of television, 2) the public's use of community television/public access television, 3) the effects of community channels on viewers and whether they are different than the effects of broadcast television and 4) the effects of broadcast policy on the structure and function of television.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.012
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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.266
Threshold uncertainty score0.852

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.012
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0040.010
Science and technology studies0.0220.010
Scholarly communication0.0090.002
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.024
GPT teacher head0.221
Teacher spread0.197 · 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
Published2008
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuecIRcle (University of British Columbia)Same topicMedia and Digital CommunicationFrench-language works237,207