MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3197936982 · doi:10.1177/10126902211039768

Masculinity, cancel culture and woke capitalism: Exploring Twitter response to Brendan Leipsic’s leaked conversation

2021· article· en· W3197936982 on OpenAlexaffabout
Daniel Sailofsky

Bibliographic record

VenueInternational Review for the Sociology of Sport · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSports, Gender, and Society
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsConversationMasculinitySociologyLeagueDismissalNarrativeCapitalismMedia studiesGender studiesPopular culturePolitical scienceLawLiteratureArtPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

On 6 May 2020, photos were leaked from a conversation in which Brendan Leipsic of the National Hockey League’s Washington Capitals, his brother Jeremy of the University of Manitoba Bisons and several others made vulgar, misogynistic comments about women and about other hockey players’ girlfriends and wives. Following the release of the conversation and the subsequent dismissal of both Leipsic brothers from their respective teams, many took to Twitter to explain their thoughts on this situation. This study analyses nearly 1000 Twitter replies to the Leipsic situation and explores how these responses are shaped by questions of masculinity, accountability, legality, privacy and hockey culture. Contrasting responses to both the scandal and the institutional response to it are emblematic of larger contemporary questions regarding narratives of ‘cancel culture’, ‘woke capitalism’, acceptable masculinities and interactions between them.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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 score0.013
Threshold uncertainty score0.026

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0020.002
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0060.005
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.371
Teacher spread0.273 · 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

Citations32
Published2021
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueInternational Review for the Sociology of SportSame topicSports, Gender, and SocietyFrench-language works237,207