Media coverage of the U.S. contribution to conflict in colombia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The Propaganda Model of communication by Herman and Chomsky has been in the periphery of academia as its authors predicted. The authors also predicted what dimensions media coverage will take when the mainstream media cover events in states where corporate-governed super powers have interests, especially the U.S. It is this prediction of media performance that this research is testing in relation to the conflict in Colombia. In recent years Latin America has achieved some nationalist governments, as in Venezuela and Bolivia, however, the U.S quest for hegemony is a fact in Latin America. How the media cover conflict in Colombia, especially in relation to contributions of the U.S and its interventions is the concern of this thesis. This research uses Critical Discourse Analysis as methodology and the PM as its conceptual framework. The Toronto Star, CBC, National Post, and the Globe and Mail are analyzed in this research. Conclusions arrived at support the PM as a good instrument for predicting media performance: Mainstream media coverage favours allies of the U.S., protects U.S. corporations, supports capitalist values and imperialist ideology, and generally neglects the interests of the masses and social justice, while the elite agenda is favoured.
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 | 0.002 | 0.011 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".