Bibliographic record
Abstract
Il peut y avoir un certain intérêt à traiter de la nature du journalisme non pas pour en circonscrire les limites, mais afin de mettre au jour les présuppositions qui président à sa pratique. C’est une proposition en ce sens qui est ici formulée. Le point de vue épistémologique qui est développé dans le texte est librement inspiré du réalisme naturaliste de John Searle et du « nouveau réalisme » de Maurizio Ferraris et Markus Gabriel. Il se décline en trois principes : un principe de réalité, un principe de vérité et un principe d’objectivité. Tels qu’ils sont ici caractérisés, ces trois principes sont ordonnés séquentiellement : du principe de réalité découle le principe de vérité duquel est dérivé le principe d’objectivité. Le principe de réalité pose que le journalisme porte sur un matériau préexistant qui lui donc indépendant : des faits existent que le journalisme prend pour objet. Ces faits sont pour la plupart ceux de la réalité sociale. Ils sont construits, mais pas par le journalisme. Suivant le principe de vérité, le journalisme fournit de la réalité dont il traite une représentation exacte. Il ne s’agit pas, en le reconnaissant, de défendre une thèse positiviste qui soutiendrait qu’il y a isomorphisme entre la réalité représentée et la représentation qu’en fournit le journalisme, mais de marquer que la visée du journalisme est de rendre compte de ce qui est effectivement le cas. Finalement, le principe d’objectivité spécifie que la quête de vérité en journalisme a pour méthode la production d’énoncés vérifonctionnels. Tel qu’ainsi entendu, le principe d’objectivité est tout à fait compatible avec l’idée de relativité conceptuelle et donc aussi avec la nature aspectuelle du journalisme. A worthwhile topic of study would be to examine the nature of journalism; not to circumscribe its boundaries, but to expose the presuppositions that govern its practice. The proposal formulated here will pursue that line of thought. The epistemological perspective that is developed in this paper is loosely inspired by the “biological naturalism” of John Searle and the “new realism” of Maurizio Ferraris and Markus Gabriel. It can be broken down into three principles: a reality principle, a truth principle and a principle of objectivity. As characterized here, these three principles are sequentially ordered: the reality principle is the source of the truth principle from which is derived the principle of objectivity. The reality principle posits that journalism is based on pre-existing material from which it is independent: facts exist that journalism uses. These facts are largely those of a social reality. They are constructed, but not by journalism. The truth principle implies that journalism provides an accurate representation of reality. It is not a question of defending a positivist thesis that would purport that isomorphism exists between the represented reality and representation provided by journalism, but to note that the target of journalism is to report what effectively exists. Finally, the principle of objectivity specifies that the quest for truth in journalism has as method the production of truth-functional statements. Understood in this way, the principle of objectivity is perfectly compatible with the idea of conceptual relativity and therefore also with the aspectual nature of journalism. Pode haver algum interesse ao lidar com a natureza do jornalismo, não para circunscrever os seus limites, mas para trazer à tona os pressupostos que regem AC sua prática. Formulamos aqui uma proposta nesse sentido. A perspectiva epistemológica desenvolvida no texto é livremente inspirada no realismo naturalista de John Searle e no “novo realismo” de Maurizio Ferraris e Markus Gabriel. Ela se declina em três princípios: um princípio de realidade, um princípio de verdade e um princípio de objetividade. Como caracterizados aqui, esses três princípios são ordenados sequencialmente: do princípio de realidade deriva o princípio de verdade a partir do qual é derivado do princípio da objetividade. O princípio de realidade postula que o jornalismo incide sob um material pré-existente e independe a ele: os fatos já existentes e que o jornalismo toma como objeto. Estes fatos são principalmente aqueles da realidade social. Eles são construídos, mas não pelo jornalismo. Seguindo o princípio de verdade, o jornalismo fornece uma representação precisa da realidade a qual ele faz referência. Não se trata aqui de reconhecer ou defender a tese positivista que apoia o isomorfismo entre a realidade representada e a representação que fornece o jornalismo, mas para marcar que o ponto de vista do jornalismo é o de dar conta dessa realidade, como acontece de fato. Finalmente, o princípio da objetividade pressupõe que a busca pela verdade no jornalismo tem como método a produção de enunciados verifuncionais. Entendido dessa forma, o princípio de objetividade é totalmente compatível com a ideia da relatividade conceitual e, portanto, também com a natureza aspectual do jornalismo.
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 | 0.010 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.042 | 0.029 |
| Open science | 0.011 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
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".