How Canadians Communicate V: Sports
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Fewer Canadians than ever are lacing up skates, swimming lengths at the pool, practicing their curve ball, and experiencing the thrill of competition. However, despite a decline in active participation, Canadians spend enormous amounts of time and money on sports, as fans and followers of sporting events and sports culture. Never has media coverage of sports been more exhaustive, and never has it been more driven by commercial interests and the need to fuel consumerism, on which corporate profits depend. The power plays now occurring in the arena of sports are by no means solely a matter of money, however. At issue as well in the media capture of sports are the values that inform our daily lives, the physical and emotional health of the population, and the symbols so long central to a sense of Canadian identity. Writing from a variety of perspectives, the contributors to this collection set out to explore the impact of the media on our reception of, and attitudes toward, sports—to unpack the meanings that sports have for us as citizens and consumers. Well-known hockey writer Roy MacGregor delves into the influence of big media and big sports on the practice of objective journalism; Richard Gruneau examines the worrisome relationship between sports participation and socioeconomic class; blogger Derrick Newman investigates the impact of fantasy leagues on sports coverage; sociologist Harry Hiller looks at the iconic dimensions of the Vancouver Olympics. Other contributors shed light on the way in which the media serve to transform sports—including, of course, hockey—into a vehicle for the expression of identity and nationalism. Still others probe the function of sports as spectacle: the escalation of violence, controversies over drug use, and the media’s coverage of tragic deaths. The goal is not to score points but to prompt critical discussion of why sports matter in Canadian life and culture and how they contribute to the construction of Canadian identity.
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 | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.021 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.034 | 0.004 |
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".