Bibliographic record
Abstract
Drawing on a social constructionist paradigm, this article critically examines mass-mediated framing of the issue of child sexual exploitation online and via mobile communications technology. The Canadian Centre for Child Protection (C3P), 1 a non-profit charity located in Winnipeg, Canada, is used as a case study of claims-making and the social construction of the social problem of child sexual exploitation online. The present study focuses on media engagement by C3P and its subsidiary CyberTip—Canada’s national internet tip line—between 2000 and 2011, just prior to CyberTip receiving legislative designation as Canada’s official reporting agency. The analysis draws on news media accounts of claims-making activities of C3P in three local and national Canadian newspapers. By focusing on the rhetoric of claims forwarded by the organization, I argue that C3P has been successful in gaining symbolic ownership of the issue and has been instrumental in defining the nature, extent, and appropriate responses to the problem of online child sexual exploitation in Canada. I conclude by considering the broader implications for criminal justice policy and practice.
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 | 0.008 | 0.015 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.024 | 0.067 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.009 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".