Bibliographic record
Abstract
Early American visual culture has played a substantial role in advancing American Imperialism in the early 1900s. Using publication as an instrument of expansionism, America’s distribution of visual images depicting its conquered nations, has resulted in consequences that have perpetually categorized its once-dominated territories as inferior. The Philippines reveal the consequences of this classification. Seized by the United States in 1899, the Philippines was repeatedly a subject of American print culture. Primarily, editorial cartoons were used to illustrate recurring images of Filipinos to justify its annexation. Employing illusive and sensational tropes, these cartoons were widely distributed through magazines and periodicals, informing the American population of debasing assumptions to characterize the Filipino individual. As a result, the Philippines gained false attributions and stereotypes brought upon by their erroneous portrayal in early American media. This research argues that the deceptive representation of the Philippines in early American visual culture, has aided in creating false Filipino stereotypes, hence, sustaining the nation in the periphery. Visual codings used in editorial cartoons repeatedly exemplified the Filipino character as incompetent and inferior. Filtration of Filipino representation is, likewise, apparent. By exaggerating damaging visual tropes that painted the Filipino individual as primitive and savage, and eliminating its progressive and modern characteristics, editorial cartoons helped reinforce the supposed ‘benevolent assimilation’ America used in defending its colonialism. Such reinforcement produced lasting consequences that not only perpetuated false Filipino stereotypes in the global platform, but also encouraged the Philippines’ inadvertent participation to cultural imperialism in present society.
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 | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.026 | 0.003 |
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".