MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W287189990

Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy

2010· article· en· W287189990 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Marc Edge

Bibliographic record

VenueJournalism & Mass Communication Quarterly · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsGrassrootsDemocracyGovernment (linguistics)Power (physics)Political scienceSociologyLawMedia studiesPolitics
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy. Donald Gutstein. Toronto, ON: Key Porter, 2009. 376 pp. $22.95 pbk. Canada has historically been a liberal country with a liberal media. From 1963 to 2005, Liberal governments held power federally about three-quarters of the time. In 2006, however, a dozen years of Liberal rule ended with the election of a minority Conservative government led by Stephen Harper, which was returned with increased support after a snap election two years later. Then, for the first time in recent memory, the 2008 election of Barack Obama saw the United States with a more liberal administration than Canada. Much of the explanation for this anomaly can be found in a recent rightward shift in Canada's news media, the background for which is illuminated by Donald Gutstein's Not a Conspiracy Theory: How Business Propaganda Hijacks Democracy. Gutstein, an emeritus faculty member in the School of Communication at Simon Fraser University, builds on the ideas of the late Australian sociologist Alex Carey. In his 1995 book, Taking the Risk Out of Democracy, Carey distinguished between grassroots propaganda, such as is occasionally required to mobilize public opinion in support of war, and treetops propaganda, which is instead aimed at elites, such as media, that are better able to directly influence the policy agenda. Carey pointed to the rise of U.S. think tanks, such as the Cato Institute and the American Enterprise Institute, starting in the mid-1970s. Backed by enormous corporate funding, they have published vast amounts of research promoting small government and free-market solutions to most economic and social problems. Greatly influential in the revival of U.S. conservatism in the 1980s under Ronald Reagan, their model was adopted by Canadians intent on replicating that success. As Canadian media ownership is even more highly concentrated than in the United States, the ascendance of rightwing solutions was comparatively easy to achieve in Canada. Gutstein chronicles the successful campaign to unite the right in Canada when the Conservative Party was reduced to just two seats in Parliament following the 1993 federal election after the party fractured along East-West lines. Conservatives in Western Canada formed the breakaway Reform party to push a deregulatory agenda that sought, among other things, tax cuts, economic integration with the United States, and even the dismantling of Canada's socialized health care system. Backed by well-heeled foundations such as the Donner Canadian Foundation, sympathetic journalists collaborated in this cause by helping to found neoconservative magazines designed to emulate Irving Kristol's influential Weekly Standard. Indeed, Harper himself even resigned his seat as a Reform Party Member of Parliament in 1997 to head the National Citizens Coalition, a tax-cutting advocacy group, and to edit the short-lived magazine Next City. By far, the biggest media boost to Canadian conservatism, however, came in 1996, when Conrad Black, one of the world's leading newspaper owners and neoconservatives, completed a hostile takeover of the country's largest newspaper chain, Southam Inc. …

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.006
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.009
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.099

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0060.009
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0140.047
Scholarly communication0.0120.014
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0040.007
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0110.002

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 head0.023
GPT teacher head0.300
Teacher spread0.276 · 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; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations9
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournalism & Mass Communication QuarterlySame topicMedia Studies and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207