MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2989761889 · doi:10.22215/etd/2016-11656

Legitimation in Corporate Discourse: The Case of Enbridge and the Northern Gateway Pipeline

2016· dissertation· en· W2989761889 on OpenAlexaff
Alicia Massie

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicDiscourse Analysis in Language Studies
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLegitimationIdeologyCritical discourse analysisStewardship (theology)Gateway (web page)Political sciencePublic relationsDiscourse analysisCapitalismSociologyPoliticsLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Despite interest in the genres of corporate discourse, and recognition of the role of corporations in shaping social knowledge and 'reality', critical discourse analysts have infrequently focused on investigating how corporate actors employ discursive strategies to represent and legitimate their activities. Widely studied in other disciplines such as political science, philosophy and law, legitimation is a necessary field of inquiry for critical discourse studies as it is through this discursive practice that corporations employ ideological arguments to influence and manipulate public knowledge and opinion. This thesis is a qualitative critical discourse and multimodal analysis of the oil corporation Enbridge's "Gateway Facts" website -an online discourse created to offer information to the public regarding their new Northern Gateway Pipeline project proposed in western

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.759
Threshold uncertainty score0.942

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.276
Teacher spread0.254 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
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

Citations2
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicDiscourse Analysis in Language StudiesFrench-language works237,207