Mediated political participation and competing discourses of online civic engagement
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article focuses on the interconnections between mediated political participation and online citizen engagement. The objective is threefold. First, it examines whether the notion of digital democracy captures the dynamic and “renewed” sense of civic responsibility brought to bear by disruptive information and communication technologies (ICTs). Second, it asks the question of whether the creation, negotiation, dissemination, and consumption of online political content really rivals those circulated by the traditional or legacy media. Finally, the article discusses the potential pitfalls of confining technological use patterns to pessimist-optimist dichotomy, arguing that such characterization ignores innovative or adapted use patterns that emerge based on varying social, political, and economic realities. Overall, the discussions presented in this article are meant to generate conceptual discussions around the links between mediated political participation and online civic engagement, and how they inform democratization processes and redistribution of political influence.Keywords: Mediated politics, mediated political participation, digital democracy, mediated public sphere, ICTs, digital divide, online civic engagement, civic responsibility
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 | 0.017 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.031 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.016 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.013 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.009 | 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".