MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2423943698 · doi:10.1080/02500167.2016.1167753

Media–state relations in Burundi: Overview of a post-traumatic media ecology

2016· article· en· W2423943698 on OpenAlexaff
Oumar Kane, Aimé-Jules Bizimana

Bibliographic record

VenueCommunicatio · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAfrican history and culture studies
Canadian institutionsUniversité du Québec en OutaouaisUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMedia ecologyState (computer science)EcologyPolitical ecologyPolitical scienceGeographySociologyMedia studiesBiologyComputer scienceLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Through an analysis of the relations between the state and the media in Burundi, this article aims to problematise these actors’ interactions within a context characterised by an asymmetry of power in favour of political authorities and some leeway enjoyed by the media. Through a review of a corpus constituted of scientific literature, reports documenting the situation of press freedom in the country, and newspaper articles, the present article shows that the legal framework governing media activity is rather protective of press freedom, despite some recent setbacks. Under this protective media context, the state uses a variety of devious means to strengthen its grip on the media sector and on journalists. The media, for their part, are obliged to manoeuvre in a post-traumatic context where issues of security have a strong public legitimacy. The article shows that in order to understand relations between the Burundian state and the media, it is necessary to place them in an asymmetrical power context where both face constraints and enjoy spaces of tactical intervention.

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 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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.627
Threshold uncertainty score0.898

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.338
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, 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

Citations5
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCommunicatioSame topicAfrican history and culture studiesFrench-language works237,207