MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2897066621 · doi:10.1177/1461444818804772

Condemned to connection? Network communitarianism in Mark Zuckerberg’s “Facebook Manifesto”

2018· article· en· W2897066621 on OpenAlexaff
Karina Rider, David Murakami Wood

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Media & Society · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsQueen's University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsManifestoSociologySocial mediaMedia studiesCommunitarianismAuthoritarianismPoliticsCapitalismPsychoanalysisDemocracyLawPolitical sciencePsychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article considers Mark Zuckerberg’s 2017 open letter titled “Building Global Community” as a political manifesto. Published just prior to an ongoing series of scandals involving Facebook and the misuse of customer data, the letter outlines Zuckerberg’s plans for the future direction of the company. Using an approach based on Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello’s connexionism, combined with Benjamin Bratton’s understanding of platforms and John Bellamy Foster and Robert W. McChesney’s, as well as Shoshana Zuboff’s, analysis of surveillance capitalism, this article argues that the letter remains significant because it constitutes a coherent statement about ubiquitous social media and the future of government in an era characterized by a global turn to authoritarianism. Evoking Japanese philosopher Hiroki Azuma’s reworking of Rousseau’s concept of “General Will” in the social media age, this article warns that one of the most dangerous aspects of the Manifesto is that it might be, in some ways, correct.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.014
Threshold uncertainty score0.039

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0110.029
Scholarly communication0.0140.014
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0050.005
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.001

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 head0.044
GPT teacher head0.326
Teacher spread0.282 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations50
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Media & SocietySame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207