‘Ghana in the Eyes of God’: Media ecology and the Anas journalistic investigation of Ghana’s judiciary
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In September 2015, investigative journalist Anas Aremeyaw Anas revealed covertly gathered audio-visual evidence of judicial corruption in Ghana. We contextualize the journalistic investigation that resulted in what became known as the ‘judges scandal’ in media ecology, emphasizing the importance of digital technologies to the investigation. From a discourse analysis of media reportage, we argue that public focus on the human agency implicated in the investigation is unmatched by conversations regarding the impact of new communication technologies that facilitated the investigation. We suggest a conversational expansion to consider ramifications of new digital communication technologies for social power relations in Ghana, and the potential for holding public office holders to account. By highlighting communication technology as a factor, we direct attention to a potential area for intervention by way of journalistic activity and civil society capacity building in Ghana.
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.
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it