Familiar Gangsters: Gang Violence, Brotherhood, and the Media’s Fascination With a Crime Family
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Media reports can have a significant and lasting impact on public perceptions about crime and criminals. Jonathan, Jarrod, and Jamie Bacon gained notoriety in Vancouver through substantial media coverage for their involvement in gang-related shootings and criminal activity. The present study examines how the media have portrayed the Bacon brothers and their importance in the region’s gang scene. We examine all articles published in the area’s largest newspaper, the Vancouver Sun, mentioning the Bacon family between 2008 and 2015 ( N = 401). Specifically, we explore the media’s depiction of the Bacons through developing a thematic content analysis, with themes tested in a keyword analysis using a corpora comparison with a set of reference articles. We argue that the Bacon brothers’ family relationship, tumultuous gang alliances, and alleged involvement in Vancouver’s worst gang-related shooting led to the media overreporting and sensationalizing their criminal activity and prominence in the local gang landscape. In addition, we contend that the popular theme of crime families provided the media with a narrative that proved useful in a context where the police and the courts were simultaneously trying to adapt to the emerging reality of violent gang conflict.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 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".