Were Producers and Audiences Ever Separate? Conceptualizing Media Production as Social Situation
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The emergence of “prosumers” and “produsers” suggests that production and reception are more conflated now than ever before. But is their mediation through the performance of hybrid roles new? And were the two ever separate? This article criticizes social theories of the media and “production studies” for overstating the distinction between producers and audiences and the instrumental means whereby the former engage the latter. It rejects this postulate of a “structured break” between production and reception by discussing the producers’ tacit knowledge of the audience, their reflexivity and socialization, and their use of “audience images.” The article then draws on Goffman (1959) and Meyrowitz (1985) to propose a new model for understanding production: as a social situation sustained by participants but explicitly oriented to an absent third party: the audience. It concludes by discussing the implications of the model for the study of production and producers.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it