How to Stigmatize: Inside the Fight for the Rhetorical History of the Seal Hunt
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Organizational stigma is a collective, negative, moral evaluation of an organization that results in increased threats to its survival. Within the extant literature, stigma is generally conceptualized as an organizational attribute, or something that an organization inherently is. Though researchers have thoroughly interrogated the processes by which organizations manage stigma and minimize stigma transfer to resource-granting stakeholders, we know very little about how an organization actually becomes stigmatized. What turns a negative event into a debilitating organizational label that becomes difficult to shake? Where does stigma come from and how can we distinguish it from related constructs like illegitimacy and poor reputation? By delving beneath the growing typologies of organizational stigma to examine the processes by which stigma emerges, this work demonstrates that organizational stigma is a social process that lends itself to a categorization rather than just a fixed category of organizations. In other words, stigmatized organizations are stigmatized only for as long as their stigmatizers actively stigmatize them. I examine the process of stigma emergence through the case of the stigmatization of seal hunting in Canada by animal rights social movement organizations (SMOs), beginning in the 1960s.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".