MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2944070830 · doi:10.25071/1913-9632.39481

Documentary Radio and the Radical Origins of Public History

2019· article· en· W2944070830 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Rachel Donaldson

Bibliographic record

VenueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and Debate · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic historyPoliticsEthosPolitical historySociologyFormative assessmentTRACE (psycholinguistics)DemocracySocial history (medicine)Cultural historyMedia studiesLawPolitical scienceAnthropology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The origin story of public history in the United States dates this profession, practice, and field of study back to the social movements and social/cultural turn of academic history of the 1960s and 70s, directly tying the emergence of professional public history to the political ethos of the New Left. However, exploring earlier efforts in professional public-facing historical work reveals the formative influence of the Old Left on the various fields that would come to fall under the purview of public history. This article traces that connection specifically through the Radio Research Project (RRP), a large-scale series of history-oriented programs produced by the Library of Congress beginning in 1941 that were designed to educate Americans in US history, to encourage citizens to embrace civic ideals such as cultural and political democracy, and to thwart the spread of fascism. Disconnecting the rise of public history from its perceived origins in the New Left through exploring programs like the RRP not only reveals a longer history of the profession, but also challenges accepted interpretations of the types of political and social views that provide the historical foundation of contemporary 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 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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score0.052

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.035
Scholarly communication0.0150.008
Open science0.0010.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.001

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 head0.051
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.260 · 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

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueLeft History An Interdisciplinary Journal of Historical Inquiry and DebateSame topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207