Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract | This essay examines the visual rhetoric of HBOs reality TV program Taxicab Confessions, New York, New York (2005). Drawing on Burke’s rhetorical understanding of scene and Straw’s approach to scene as a category for the analysis of urban culture, I argue that the taxicab interior and nighttime street images of New York City structure a scene of indeterminacy, intimacy, and “reality,” thus framing the passengers’ self-presentations within a context of “authenticity.” The program’s visual structure locates passengers simultaneously outside of and within social norms and reinforces hegemonic notions of race, gender, and sexuality. Passengers are situated within a scene that positions them as both eccentric and ordinary, while audiences are provided with a symbolic other that works to contain stretched-but-not-broken norms and thus anchor the normality of the viewer.Résumé | Cet article examine la rhétorique visuelle de l’émission de téléréalité d’HBO Taxicab Confessions New York, New York (2005). En m’appuyant sur l’interprétation rhétorique de Burke de la scène et sur l’approche de Straw de la scène en tant que catégorie pour l’analyse de la culture urbaine, je soutiens que l’intérieur du taxi et les images nocturnes des rues de New York créent une scène d’indétermination, d’intimité et de « réalité », cadrant ainsi l’autoreprésentation des passagers dans un contexte d’« authenticité ». La structure visuelle de l’émission permet de situer les passagers tant à l’extérieur qu’à l’intérieur des normes sociales et de renforcer les notions hégémoniques de race, de genre, et de sexualité. Les passagers sont situés dans une scène qui les positionne à la fois comme excentriques et ordinaires, tandis que le public est doté d’une symbolique autre qui travaille à contenir des normes assouplies, mais non enfreintes, enracinant ainsi la normalité du spectateur.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.017 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.005 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 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".