Mickeys, Minis and Pints: An Investigation of the Marketing and Advertising Initiatives of Seagram and Hiram Walker, 1950-1969
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation is an investigation of the marketing and advertising initiatives of two Canadian distillers Hiram Walker and Seagram in the United States from 1950 until 1969. The study contributes to the field of alcohol studies as it explores the divergent meanings alcoholic beverage advertisements conveyed about drinking in relation to constructs of gender, race and class. This dissertation demonstrates that while Seagram and Hiram Walker’s advertising campaigns and marketing efforts targeted white, middle class men, they disseminated competing and contradictory messages about masculinity and normative alcohol consumption to reach consumers with varied interests. The dissertation argues that despite the existence of an established heterosocial cocktail culture in the 1950s, the majority of Seagram and Hiram Walker’s whisky advertisements presented drinking as a homosocial activity. During the 1950s and 1960s, Hiram Walker and Seagram tried to increase market share by advertising to women and African American consumers in novel ways. This dissertation compares and contrasts the distillers’ advertisements directed at white men, women and African American consumers. As well, it adds to the history of advertising as it explores how the distilleries tried to influence consumers’ purchasing decisions, tap into their desires, expand market share and increase sales at a time when competition was intensifying.
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 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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".