The emerging ‘Alternative’ journalism paradigm: Arab journalists and online news
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The shifting political landscape in the Middle East and North Africa have riveted the world’s attention and drawn media scholars’ scrutiny to the ‘Arab Internet’ at large. Despite this attention, research on the ‘Arab Internet’ has not received its due, and it is even more limited when it comes to exploring online news and journalism. Scholarly works and mainstream media commentary on the subject continue to be predominantly anecdotal with little support from grounded data and evidence. Striving to fill this gap, we argue in this article that the Internet’s seeds of the ‘Arab Spring’ were fomenting for years, slowly but perceptibly transforming Arab news and journalism. To understand these social upheavals requires a dissection of ‘online journalism’, i.e. the new forms of journalistic practice facilitated by the Web. This article analyses the burgeoning online journalism field in the Arab world, and debates the journalism shifts wrought by the Internet, and the future of journalism practices in the Arab world. We argue that Arab online journalists are constructing a new mode of professional practice, best described as ‘alternative’ journalism practice.
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 | 0.015 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".