'Frack'turing Canadian settler narratives: the Elsipogtog shale gas protests and indigenous women's resistance
Bibliographic record
Abstract
On October 17, 2013, a group of Mi’kmaq people from Elsipogtog, New \nBrunswick garnered national attention for defending their land against shale gas \ndevelopment. The focal point of the event was the Elsipogtog First Nation’s clash with \nthe RCMP, which resulted in the arrest of 40 so-called protestors. By interspersing \nfootage of the protest with images of burning police cars, rifles, and staunchly held \nblockades, the media portrayed the protestors’ actions as radical and violent. Amidst the \nflurry of mainstream media coverage, the people of Elsipogtog were active in challenging \nthe misrepresentations of their actions and their communities; among them the women of \nthe community were especially vocal and instrumental in continuing the resistance \nagainst shale gas. However, despite the active involvement of women from Elsipogtog in \nthe protest, they largely disappeared from the mainstream media. This thesis explores \nhow Indigenous women confront erasure and unsettle the dense mythological terrain of \nCanadian national narratives.
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 | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.059 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.010 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.008 | 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".