FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN THE NATIONAL MEDIA AND REFUTING THE MEDIA OF GLOBALIZATION (AMERICA)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term "media globalization" came as an extension of the vision of the famous Canadian communications (Marshall McLuhan) to transform the world into a global village, and that the idea appeared to be media, but it branched out to include the various aspects of life, warning of colonialism of a new type adopts American culture occupies the mind and conscience through which the objectives and interests of the invading state. The researcher was able to determine the objectives of the research through some of the questions: 1. Since American culture holds 65% of the world's information material, does not it have the right to dominate the whole world? Especially since its content contains the American values and principles that they always "broadcast" such as freedom and human rights. 2. Has globalization "American" media turned into itself? 3. Why do advocates of "American" media globalization want to be in one direction? 4. Why are the advocates of globalization, "American" media spying on the Internet and locking websites? 5 - How to achieve globalization, "America" and America raise the slogan of either be with us or against us? 6. How has the modern Turkish national media been able to counter the global media offensive against Turkish national development? 7. Is it not the right of the peoples of the Arab Spring revolutions to have media that protects their societies - from their and most reluctant governments first - and secondly from the media "American" globalization that tries to use those achievements for subversive purposes? The researcher chose the descriptive approach in the survey studies, based on the personal observation and follow-up of the materials and programs of many media in different Arab and Islamic countries, it turns out that globalization or "America" carries a culture (Western American) invade the cultures of other societies, A new colonial orientation
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 | 0.007 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.038 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.015 | 0.010 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 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".