Discours racistes et propagande haineuse. Trois groupes populistes identitaires au Québec
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cet article exploratoire vise à cerner les éléments de « propagande haineuse » utilisés par trois groupes populistes identitaires (Atalante, La Meute, la Fédération des Québécois de souche) sur leurs pages Facebook publiques entre le 29 janvier et le 15 mars 2017, après l’attentat du 29 janvier à la grande mosquée de Québec. L’article définit les groupes populistes de type identitaire au Québec et rappelle les principaux mécanismes du racisme, les procédés classiques utilisés par les médias traditionnels qui permettent d’influencer les idées et les représentations du public (agenda setting,framing,priming), les techniques classiques de propagande et les différentes balises juridiques (pénales et civiles) qui encadrent la propagande haineuse au Canada. L’article montre comment les leaders d’opinion et/ou administrateurs de ces pages Facebook publiques en font un usage stratégique (pour alimenter le néonationalisme, orienter les échanges sur des enjeux identitaires et maintenir un sentiment de crise et d’appartenance commune) et dont les effets préjudiciables sont visibles.
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 | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.005 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".