Analysis of the Role of the Press in the Egyptian Revolution of 2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>The Egyptian Revolution of 2011, in fact was the result of crises in the Egyptian society; such as increasing social inequality and corruption and Mubarak’s efforts to inherit the presidency. These crises by the help of the media –from the press to the social networks- provided the grounds for shaping anti-Mubarak social movements and eventually led to fall him. In this regard, one of the most considerable point, was the salient role of the press and the print media in the process of the revolution. Traditionally, there have been three types of journalism system in Egypt: the state-owned, independent and partisan (party-run) press. In this context, the researcher has tried to answer this question: how was the role and position of each type of these press systems in Egypt in the process of the revolution -especially since January 25th until February 11, the day that Mubarak resigned-, and how effective were these roles and positions on the Egyptian Revolution of 2011?<strong></strong></p><p>In this regard, in addition to detailed introduction of the newspapers of each press, the emphasis is to observe their views and positions accurately and portray the main discrepancies between the state-owned press with the independent and partisan papers.</p>As the findings of the research show, it seems in the Egyptian Revolution of 2011, the relative freedom of these traditional media in expressing their own views with the growth of the middle class, enabled Egypt to pass the Mubarak's thirty-year dictatorship by mobilizing their demands and forming powerful social movements.
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 | 0.001 | 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".