Mobile Journalism and Innovation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Using a qualitative methodological approach, this chapter brings to bear a theoretical and conceptual framework with particular consideration to the notions of innovation, journalistic convergence, design and the theory of affordances, as well as mobile communication and mobile journalism. This analysis covers the period 2010-2014 and seeks to examine the specific affordances, the structure, organization and types of narratives produced; the design and use of multimedia features as well as the level of integration with other products in the same news organization. The empirical corpus consists of products selected for their representativeness within a broader sample: O Globo a Mais, Estadão Noite, and Diário do Nordeste Plus (Brazil), La Repubblica Sera (Italy), La Presse+ (Canada) and El Mundo de la Tarde (Spain). The study concludes that - although timid - experimentation continues to prevail regarding formats, content, language and narratives based on the features of mobile devices, the continuous evolution of operating systems and changes in hardware platforms.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.010 | 0.022 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.012 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 0.001 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
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".