Framing Peace, the case of conciliatory radio programming in Burundi and Uganda
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This working paper uses insights from completed research on ‘peace radio’ in Uganda to discuss the strategy for completing the same interrogation of ‘peace radio’ in Burundi. In relative detail, the paper discusses how and why the peace journalism model is the most appropriate theoretical framework to study the ‘peace radio’ model in Burundi. The paper presents three cases chosen for study namely: a) Murikira Ukuri programme, Kirundi for ‘enlighten with the truth’, produced by Studio Ijambo; b) Le Burundi Avance (Burundi Advancing) produced by the BINUB (Bureau Intégré des Nations Unies au Burundi); and c) the Rondera Amahoro programme, Kirundi for ‘in quest of peace’, produced and broadcast by RTNB (Radio Télévision Nationale Burundaise). From the Ugandan research, the ‘peace journalism’ model manifests a shaky uptake (Tayeebwa 2012). While Ugandan journalists and media actors were able to appreciate the media values of peace, they were still equally entrenched in their practice using the conventional media values that favour conflict and violence. In this paper, the research questions and methods to interrogate the Burundian cases are discussed.
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 | 0.005 | 0.014 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.032 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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; 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".