One Day in Fremantle: TV representation of this alternative to Australia Day
Bibliographic record
Abstract
A 2016 decision by the City of Fremantle in Western Australia to change its date of national celebration generated a televised controversy about the municipal observance of Australia Day. Beneath this controversy, Fremantle's decision to change the date reflects a long ongoing struggle over the colonization of country belonging to Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.This struggle can be traced back to the landing of the First Fleet of British settlers in Cadigal, Eora, country (Sydney) on 26 January 1788.This paper analyses the context of Fremantle's decision and considers how television and current affairs reported it to audiences across Australia.Twenty-eight news and current affairs video recordings broadcast between 25 August 2016 and 29 January 2018 by ABC, Nine, NITV, Seven and SBS networks were analysed.Key themes emerging from this study are discussed, including: the emptiness and trouble with Australia Day representation; diversion through division and false economy; and, from genocide to solidarity with Aboriginal leadership.Finally, this paper offers an opportunity for understanding how Australian community has been imagined and how community in Australia could be imagined.
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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 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".