Framing Analysis of Village Funding Corruption in Media Suaramerdeka.Com in Central Java, Indonesia, 2019
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Various corruption cases have occurred in many villages in Central Java, Indonesia. Corruption is mostly carried out by village officials in running the government. One of many factors causing such corruption cases is the existence of village fund assistance. These corruption cases have been published in the mass media, Specifically on online media, i.e. suaramerdeka.com This study aims to look at the media framing of corruption cases that have occurred in Central Java, particularly concerning village funding assistance in various regions through the online media suaramerdeka.com. This study is a constructive paradigm research. The approach method used is qualitative. Meanwhile, the analytical method used is the Robert N. Entman framing analysis model. The findings of this study stated that suaramerdeka.com framed the perpetrators of corruption as village officials. Although it is acknowledged that not all of them are corrupt, the news seems to give the impression that village officials have conducted a lot of corruption. However, on the other hand, the news content of suaramerdeka.com as a local media in Central Java also lacks detail in reporting corruption issues. Moreover, it seems only normative and does not show that it is a strong media in covering corruption cases. The explanation of the news was not very in-depth.
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.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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 it