MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3163227755 · doi:10.1177/13548565211013183

‘You betrayed us’: Ethnic celebrity gossip in diasporic women’s online communities

2021· article· en· W3163227755 on OpenAlexaff
Jin Lee, Claire Shinhea Lee

Bibliographic record

VenueConvergence The International Journal of Research into New Media Technologies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsUniversity of the Fraser Valley
Fundersnot available
KeywordsHousewifeGossipEthnic groupGender studiesImmigrationSociologyMedia studiesPolitical scienceLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article examines a relationship between ethnic celebrities and diasporic communities by focusing on one case of Korean diasporic women gossiping about Korean actress Seo Min-jung. After a 10-year hiatus following her sudden migration to the United States and marriage to a Korean American dentist in 2007, Seo made a successful comeback to show business by starring in Korean reality shows and opening her Instagram account. Seo’s struggles as a Korean immigrant woman/housewife/mother, portrayed in TV shows and on Instagram, positively resonated with diasporic Korean women’s online communities (DKWOC). This positive discourse around Seo, however, transformed into celebrity bashing when her Instagram scandal happened in 2019. We trace the change of gossip around Seo in DKWOC concerning Korean diasporic women’s identity and status. We argue that DKWOC members’ gossiping of Seo functions as a way of coping with their situation, as they come to recognise the class difference between themselves and Seo and feel disempowered by their dissatisfying circumstances as immigrants.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.013

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.007
Scholarly communication0.0040.004
Open science0.0010.008
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.152
GPT teacher head0.442
Teacher spread0.289 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueConvergence The International Journal of Research into New Media TechnologiesSame topicAsian Culture and Media StudiesFrench-language works237,207