MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2519264866 · doi:10.1177/1077695816637505

Book Review: <i>Canada Lives Here: The Case for Public Broadcasting</i> , by Wade Rowland

2016· article· en· W2519264866 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Kenneth C. Creech

Bibliographic record

VenueJournalism & Mass Communication Educator · 2016
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCanadian Policy and Governance
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic broadcastingBroadcasting (networking)Media studiesGovernment (linguistics)DemocracyPolitical sciencePublishingPublic serviceSociologyPublic relationsPublic administrationLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Wade Rowland Canada Lives Here: The Case for Public Broadcasting. Westmount, Quebec, Canada: Linda Leith Publishing, 2015. 240 pp.Canada Lives Here is a call for action to the Canadian people and their government. Wade Rowland draws upon his many years of experience in Canadian public television news and management to make a strong case supporting the importance of a robust public service broadcasting system to Canadian culture and democracy. However, Canada Lives Here also has an important message that goes beyond the borders of Canada. The message is that the role of the public broadcaster is to ensure that people in a democratic society can learn about important issues, engage culture and the arts, and constructively tackle the issues facing their nation.For Rowland, this role can only be fully achieved through noncommercial media. He asserts that crafters of necessary illusions and the manufacturers of consent theoretically do not influence noncommercial media, unlike their commercial counterparts (p. 2). Rowland is quite harsh on commercial broadcasters throughout this book, and he sometimes glosses over the fact that the governments with direct or indirect control of public broadcasting's purse strings may also have points of view that they hope will be expressed. However, the essence of this point is well-taken.Rowland believes that public broadcasting in Canada is in a state of decline. He supports this thesis by taking the reader on a historical tour of the origins of public broadcasting in Canada, through several administrations. Some of those administrations nurtured public broadcasting and others, through a number of measures, including budget cutting and administrative reorganization, brought the service to the brink of extinction.All public television systems receive some sort of funding from their country's government or a quasi-governmental agency like the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB) in the United States. But ultimately the actual funds come from the people, and in the end, public broadcasting is expected to give back in the form of high quality programming that is beneficial to society. To do this effectively, a public broadcasting system must be adequately resourced. Rowland argues that Canadian public broadcasting lags far behind its European counterparts in the per capita subsidies at $28CAD. For example, he notes that in Norway's public broadcasting, funding is $180CAD per capita, while Germany's is $124 per capita and the United Kingdom is $97CAD per capita. As a point of information, in 2011, the United States spent $4USD per capita for public broadcasting (http://www.niemanlab.org/2011/03/ Funding-Public-Media-How-The-US-Compares-To-The-Rest-of-the-world/).Rowland worries that a combination of a dwindling subsidy, the migration of some heretofore public TV programs to commercial networks-including NHL Hockey-and a sense by some regulators that terrestrial broadcast television might no longer be necessary means that it could be replaced by less-expensive-to-operate online media services. …

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.983
Threshold uncertainty score0.979

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.009
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.004
Open science0.0020.001
Research integrity0.0040.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0370.015

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 head0.303
Teacher spread0.280 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournalism & Mass Communication EducatorSame topicCanadian Policy and GovernanceFrench-language works237,207