Exploring Media Coverage of the 2017 World Indigenous Nations Games and North American Indigenous Games: A Critical Discourse Analysis
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study examines how Indigenous voices were represented in Canadian mainstream media coverage of the two international Indigenous sporting events hosted in Canada in 2017. A critical discourse analysis guided by the concept of Settler Colonialism reveals that mainstream media provided some opportunities for Indigenous stakeholders to bring issues facing their communities to the attention of the Canadian public. The tensions and challenges identified by Indigenous stakeholders included stereotypes of non-Indigenous people, identity struggles within Indigenous communities, a lack of resources and opportunities for Indigenous youth, the vulnerability of Indigenous women, and the difficulty for Indigenous sporting achievements to be acknowledged. Although these struggles were associated with issues such as the legacy of assimilation policies, the lack of education on relevant topics in school, and other socioeconomic barriers within many Indigenous communities, the discourse stops short of questioning the legitimacy of the Canadian settler state.
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.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 it