Translating the epidemic of fear-based rhetoric in Canadian press: A case study and framework
Bibliographic record
Abstract
News, as we know, saturates our lives: from the morning newspaper to televised late-night reports there is no denying the influence and impact media can have on our daily lives. In the context of a post September the 11th world, one of the dominant trends in press media is the use of fear-based rhetoric. This research paper is concerned with how the Canadian press media constructs fear, particularly the fear of disease, and how this fear is further disseminated through translation. As well, it explores some of the dominant discourses concerning translation in the press and in general. The main hypothesis is that translation acts as a space of contagion with the power to disseminate certain emotions that develop in response to current events. Observations include a case study of French and English-Canadian press articles on the avian flu and the discursive strategies used to convey fear of the disease, as well as a potential framework for translators of the press.
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 | 0.011 | 0.021 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.038 | 0.027 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| 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".