Framing international crises: a comparative content analysis of media texts on the collapse of Venezuela
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This research explores mainstream and diasporic media coverage and discourses surrounding the Venezuelan economic and political crisis from late March 2017 until early May 2018. A comparative content analysis was applied to a total of 256 news articles, editorials, and stories from the Toronto Star, one of Canada’s largest newspapers, and from La Portada Canadá, a Spanish-language Latin American newspaper in Toronto. The results demonstrated diasporic media’s appropriation of journalistic biases such as human impact, dramatization, and national interests and the reframing of dominant discourses from international news agencies about the Venezuelan crisis. Whereas there are significant similarities between both media’s content regarding the crisis, La Portada Canadá stressed the transnational component of the Venezuelan diaspora through discourses about political and civic engagement in Canada. The Toronto Star focused more on the economic and political components of the crisis, which are closely linked to the country’s national agenda. Keywords: diasporic media, mainstream media, media coverage, media discourses, international crises, humanitarian crisis, Venezuela, Toronto
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 | 0.003 | 0.013 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.013 | 0.015 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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".