MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2984162081 · doi:10.1177/0020852319870241

Media coverage of reports published by the Québec Ombudsman: an automated content analysis

2019· article· en· W2984162081 on OpenAlex

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.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.
aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review of Administrative Sciences · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicOmbudsman and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsUniversité LavalUniversité du Québec à Montréal
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperTone (literature)Media coverageMandatePolitical scienceContent analysisNews mediaPrint mediaVisibilityLawSociologyMedia studies

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines media coverage of reports published by the Québec Ombudsman, a body that upholds the rights of citizens and that goes by the name of ‘Public Protector’. A large part of the Québec Ombudsman’s mandate is to conduct investigations and issue recommendations following infringements by Québec’s administrative apparatus that affect one or several citizens. These infringements are reported to the ombudsman by citizens, which means that it must be visible to the public. Such visibility relies, to a great extent, on the media, hence the importance of analysing the Québec Ombudsman’s media coverage, a subject that has received little attention in the academic literature. Our article reveals that media coverage of the ombudsman’s reports is inconsistent. We also observe that, on average, newspaper articles adopt a more negative tone than the reports themselves. However, contrary to our expectations, reports with a more negative tone are not necessarily given more media coverage. The best predictor of the presence or absence of media coverage and tone congruence between reports and articles appears to be the presence of a press release issued by the ombudsman. Points for practitioners This article examines media coverage of reports published by the Québec Ombudsman. Based on an automated content analysis, it appears that the media coverage of the reports is not explained by the tone used in the documents published by the Québec Ombudsman. Reports that are more negative are not necessarily given greater coverage by journalists than positive reports. Direct communication efforts with the media (e.g. a press conference and the publication of a press release) are more likely to lead to media coverage.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesInsufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.714
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.086
GPT teacher head0.412
Teacher spread0.326 · 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