MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2313385607 · doi:10.1080/08821127.2015.1134972

The Scramble for African Media: The British Government, Reuters, and Thomson in the 1960s

2016· article· en· W2313385607 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

VenueAmerican Journalism · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperGovernment (linguistics)Independence (probability theory)Agency (philosophy)JournalismPolitical scienceMedia studiesPolitical economyEconomic historyHistorySociologyLawSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the wave of independence in Africa in the late 1950s and early 1960s, the British government sought not only to maintain influence in former colonies but also to expand it in the rest of the continent. One lever of influence was news media. The British government encouraged and subsidized London-based media to expand in Africa to block the Soviets, forestall competitors, and preserve British influence in a classic example of media imperialism. The Reuters news agency used a secret subsidy to greatly expand its Africa coverage and sign up new national governments as clients. Anglo-Canadian newspaper millionaire Roy Thomson, who sought a peerage, cooperated closely with the government as he invested heavily in African newspapers and television systems and journalism training.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.788
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0040.002
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 head0.015
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.250 · 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