MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3040579214 · doi:10.1080/19392397.2020.1787856

Everything old is new again: reality television celebrity, the Hollywood studio system, and the battle for control of one’s image

2020· article· en· W3040579214 on OpenAlexaff
Andrea Ruehlicke

Bibliographic record

VenueCelebrity Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHollywoodBattleStudioVisual artsArtMultimediaComputer graphics (images)AdvertisingReality tvMedia studiesComputer scienceArt historyHistorySociologyBusiness

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines how reality celebrity differs from more traditional forms of celebrity and the impacts that understanding has on working conditions. Many challenges faced by participants on reality TV result from the understanding of their labour as unskilled and replaceable. Looking at how individuals like actors and extras gained protections in the past provides a framework to consider possibilities for reality participants. The contracts and working conditions facing current reality television contestants have strong similarities to those faced by actors in early Hollywood. Restrictive contracts, difficulty in organising, and extreme disparity in power relations were major features of the star system and are currently negatively affecting the working conditions of those appearing in reality programming. Reality television has enacted a system that features much of the power imbalance that early film stars faced, but that offers little of the rewards.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.616
Threshold uncertainty score0.936

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.092
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.243 · 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
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCelebrity StudiesSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207