“BUT WE ARE NOT POWERLESS AGAINST THIS PROBLEM”: OLDER PEOPLE, LONELINESS AND THE MEDIA
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Media campaigns play a critical role in framing public perceptions or ‘public talk’ around social issues. The media’s role in characterizing the loneliness ‘problem’ is, however, an under explored area. This paper presents the language of loneliness and loneliness representations in the media in Canada and England over a 10-year period (2009-2018) and their relationship with key policy initiatives specific to an ageing population. Using qualitative content analysis, the findings illustrate the use of skilled marketing techniques and highly stigmatizing discourse. These media approaches act to: (1) reinforce the threat of an ageing population; (2) endorse responsibilization and governmentality of the body; and (3) promote individual and/or family shame and morally responsible actions by charities and volunteers. We conclude that there is a need for a critical analysis of loneliness from the perspective of social and cultural constructions of ageing, the positioning of older people in society, and neo-liberalist ideology
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 | 0.003 | 0.007 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.008 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| 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".