MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3042462137 · doi:10.1386/jams_00018_1

CCTV in Africa: Constructive approach to manufacturing consent

2020· article· en· W3042462137 on OpenAlexaff
Yu Xiang, Xiaoxing Zhang

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of African Media Studies · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Development and Aid
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsChinaConstructiveEliteJournalismPoliticsHarmony (color)Context (archaeology)Political scienceMedia studiesSociologyPublic relationsLawHistory

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

China Central Television (CCTV) launched its first media centre in Nairobi, Kenya, in 2012 and is one of the main actors in the ‘China’s media go global’ campaign. CCTV-Africa’s reporting style has previously been engaged by media practitioners and academics in terms of its discursive practices. In 2014, a new paradigm studying the journalistic practice of Chinese media in Africa emerged. It has been argued that the journalistic approach deployed by Chinese media in Africa, especially CCTV-Africa, is more constructive than simply positive. This article aims to provide a structural analysis on the role of international news in mediating and reinforcing the ‘harmony of interest’ of transnational elite groups with empirical findings from the case study of CCTV-Africa and its constructive approach of journalism. The findings of this research show that the ‘constructiveness’ of CCTV-Africa is marked with the ‘non-interference’ diplomatic strategy of China in Africa which minimalizes the political involvement of China in local conflicts by reducing investigation on causes and emphasizing solutions. Simultaneously, it also produces an apolitical context which encourages economic development in African societies to cater to the grander politics of China in Africa.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.118
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.147
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.118
Threshold uncertainty score0.622

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.1180.147
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.001
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.030
Scholarly communication0.0110.010
Open science0.0020.011
Research integrity0.0050.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.002

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 head0.122
GPT teacher head0.325
Teacher spread0.204 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

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

Citations11
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of African Media StudiesSame topicInternational Development and AidFrench-language works237,207