Bibliographic record
Abstract
Revision with unchanged content. As the chorus demanding substantive worldwide action on global warming grows louder, the stakes are ever higher for human health, the environment, and the economy. Research has established that the news media both reflect and influence public opinion and the policymaking process. An understanding of news coverage of climate change and its sibling, the ozone hole, is invaluable for anyone serious about addressing today's global environmen-tal problems. This interdisciplinary study illuminates the impact of American press coverage on the global warming and stratospheric ozone debates as they unfolded over the past quarter century. Using an original content ana-lysis approach, it takes stock of trends in economic, political, social, scientific, and environmental arguments in hundreds of news reports and examines their role in the very different outcomes of the Kyoto and Montreal protocols. Interviews with key players in the process round out the analysis. This work is relevant to many fields - including communication, journalism, environmental studies, and the policy sciences - and it has important implications for those working on the front lines of today's climate change fight.
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 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 | 0.001 | 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 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, 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".