Una reflexión de comunicación organizacional sobre la idea de “responsabilidad” adoptada por los gobiernos civiles y militares en la Argentina de las últimas décadas
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
espanolEste articulo propone un estudio –desde la perspectiva desarrollada por la Escuela de Montreal de comunicacion organizacional– sobre el concepto de responsabilidad vehiculado por los diferentes actores relacionados con la dictadura militar ocurrida en la Argentina entre 1976 y 1983. Partiendo de la propuesta de la revista Dialogos de la comunicacion, que destaca la duplicidad semantica del concepto “organizacion”, en tanto “asociacion de personas regulada por un conjunto de normas en funcion de determinados fines” y “accion y efecto de organizar y organizarse”, se plantea analizar un corpus de textos contenidos en el informe Nunca mas, para dar cuenta de la manera en que se han organizado las instituciones estatales de poder en la Argentina de las ultimas decadas. EnglishThis paper proposes a study from a Montreal-school of organizational communication perspective of the concept of responsibility mobilized by the various actors involved with the military dictatorship in Argentina occurred between 1976 and 1983. Based on the proposal of Dialogos de la comunicacion Journal that emphasizes the semantic duplicity of the concept “organization” both as “Association of persons regulated by a set of rules based on certain ends” and “Action and effect of organize and organizing” I propose to analyze a corpus of texts contained in the Nunca Mas (Never Again) report to account for the way government institutions have been organizing in Argentina in recent decades.
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 | 0.008 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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