The illusion of inclusion: Agenda 21 and the commodification of Aboriginal culture in the Vancouver 2010 Olympic Games
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 This article investigates the discourse about Aboriginal people benefitting from the 2010 Olympic Games and argues there was nothing fundamentally new about Aboriginal involvement in Vancouver, except for an unprecedented mobilization of Aboriginal bodies, land and insignia. In this regard, Aboriginal inclusion in 2010 was definitely different from past Games. There were more Aboriginal performers, artists and volunteers, more cultural imagery in strategic locations, and more indigenous merchandise for sale than ever before. Yet, in spite of their increased visibility, the power relations sustaining historic inequities between Olympic organizers and Aboriginal people remained largely unchanged. Indeed, a closer look at how Aboriginal people were involved in the Vancouver Games, the promises made to them, and the legacies that actually materialized, suggests the present day arrangement for Aboriginal people within the Olympic industry has actually worsened.
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 | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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