MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2894805245 · doi:10.1080/23268743.2018.1513818

¡Prohibida! Armando Bó and Isabel Sarli's struggle with censorship in Argentina

2018· article· es· W2894805245 on OpenAlexaff
Victoria Ruétalo

Bibliographic record

VenuePorn Studies · 2018
Typearticle
Languagees
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicCinema History and Criticism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCensorshipFilm directorLawArtPolitical scienceHumanitiesArt history

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

By exploring the work of the sexploitation couple Armando Bó and Isabel Sarli this article gives a history of different periods of film censorship in Argentina beginning in 1955, after the coup that ousted the democratically elected Juan Domingo Perón. The article works through different stages to show that while there was official censorship from 1963 to 1984, instituted through Argentina's Film Classification Board, censorship was a growing practice that legally increased in the post-Perón period. The only exception occurred during a fleeting moment of 90 days in 1973 when filmmaker Octavio Getino was comptroller of the Classification Board and Peronism was returning. Working with the remnants of the Intimidades de una cualquiera [Intimacies of a Prostitute] file, the only remaining but incomplete Bó file in existence, and with other archival materials (press clippings, surviving film versions, official laws), this article helps to reveal possible reasons behind Bó's censorship.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
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 score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.088

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0080.008
Scholarly communication0.0050.002
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.058
GPT teacher head0.289
Teacher spread0.231 · 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

Citations2
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePorn StudiesSame topicCinema History and CriticismFrench-language works237,207