MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2726808574 · doi:10.1177/073953290202300110

<i>NRJ</i> Book: Ralph Emerson McGill: Voice of the Southern Conscience

2002· article· en· W2726808574 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Patrick S. Washburn

Bibliographic record

VenueNewspaper Research Journal · 2002
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicAmerican Sports and Literature
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConscienceHistoryArtMedia studiesPolitical scienceSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Ralph Emerson McGill: Voice of Southern Conscience By Leonard Ray Teel (Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press, 2001), 559 pages Reviewed by Patrick S. Washburn In July 1966, managing editor of Atlanta Journal took seven of us who had recently joined news editorial staff to meet Ralph McGill, publisher of Atlanta newspapers. We saw him for about ten minutes. After we briefly introduced ourselves, he welcomed us to paper and we left. For remainder of my year at Journal, I never saw McGill again and thought little about meeting. But as years wore on and I occasionally ran across his name as one of Southern journalists who had led way in ending segregation, I slowly began to appreciate significance of what had occurred. We had met of whom Atlanta papers were so proud. Now, that man comes alive in a book by Leonard Ray Teel, a former reporter at Atlanta Constitution and now an associate professor of communications at Georgia State University. Based on 14 years of extensive research in primary documents and numerous interviews, he has produced a splendid book that will satisfy both academic historians, who demand rigor, and non-academics, who like lively biographies. It also should be required reading for all newspaper editorial and column writers. Woven throughout book are numerous insights by McGill into what it takes to succeed in demanding grind of continually turning out a daily column as well as crafting editorials that make a difference in society. As Teel notes, McGill's life did not begin auspiciously. Shortly before he was to graduate from Vanderbilt, he wrote a column in weekly student newspaper that wondered why a student lounge had not been built, even though funds had been given for it. Had money been embezzled? The chancellor did not like column, and McGill was suspended. Then, he got into further trouble with a prank when he invited prostitutes to a dance at a rival fraternity. As a result, he never graduated, although later he would receive honorary doctorates. Meanwhile, he already was working at Nashville Banner as a sportswriter, and in 1929 he went to Atlanta Constitution. Over next forty years, although McGill never lost his love of sports, he left sports behind as he became enthralled with politics and dream of what Atlanta could be in newly developing South. A hard-drinking workaholic who continually read three books a week, he sought fame in his column writing, sometimes worrying that it would never come. But it did as he quickly became known as a great storyteller as well as someone who gently led his readers, whether they liked it or not. He was not always gentle in his writing, particularly with short-sighted politicians. As he put it succintly to a friend, Sometimes, you have to step out in center of ring and hit them in nose. What makes Teel's book fascinating is that it slowly takes reader on McGill's journey through segregation period. The reader can see McGill's views changing over years. As implausible as it may seem, he originally was against an anti-lynching law and supported poll taxes. And, at first, he did not speak out against segregation, which in polite Southern society was known simply as the situation. That was way it was. One did not discuss it. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.175

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.002
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0520.026

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.

Opus teacher head0.078
GPT teacher head0.293
Teacher spread0.215 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNewspaper Research JournalSame topicAmerican Sports and LiteratureFrench-language works237,207