MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2769533514 · doi:10.3968/9916

Pursuit of Power: A Critical Discourse Analysis of the CNN and China Daily South China Sea Reports

2017· article· en· W2769533514 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Bingtian Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueCross-cultural communication · 2017
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaGlobeIdeologyCritical discourse analysisValue (mathematics)Power (physics)Critical readingReading (process)Perspective (graphical)Order (exchange)SociologySelection (genetic algorithm)News valuesMedia studiesLinguisticsHistoryNews mediaPsychologyPolitical scienceComputer sciencePoliticsVisual artsLawArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

With the value of news report prominently increasing, the issue of South China Sea has drawn attention from plenty western media and the public and consequently become a hot topic reported by presses around the globe. CNN and China Daily, the two representative English-language presses from the U.S. and China, tend to adopt different dictions while they report the same event or news from the same source, in order to convey their own attitudes to readers and inculcate different value judgments in an imperceptible way. In this article, with relevant theories and methods of Critical Discourse Analysis and from the perspective of word selection, the author compared and analyzed two pieces of typical news in seven aspects, revealed the inconspicuous ideologies and power factors in the texts so as to help readers cultivate their rational thinking and take critical reading of news reports.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.674
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0020.006
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.025
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.331 · 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; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.

Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCross-cultural communicationSame topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207