Technology-centred Discourses in European Audiovisual Policy: Will Euro-Techno out-Fox the US Assembly Line?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper outlines the region-building initiatives of European audiovisual policy that are justified by a technology-centred discourse. While highlighting technology as a central and powerful theme in the European policy discourse, this paper begins to challenge the discourse’s depiction of reality. Specifically, the existing audiovisual environment suggests that notwithstanding Europeanization rhetoric in cultural policy decisions, there is a de facto Americanization of audiovisual space. Because of the apparent failure of the European Union to establish a unified competitive market, this paper analyzes the relationship between three variables competing in cultural policymaking. The first section lays out policy discourses characterized by European identity-formation. The second section describes the reality of cultural patterns in the EU that are characterized by diversity and audience fragmentation. The third section explains the reality of audiovisual space that is characterized by American products. A discussion follows of the restrictive effects that such policy discourse has on future policymaking decisions in the EU, bringing to question the success of any new policy orientation that is based around technology in both harmonizing European broadcasting policy and in rivaling its American competitor.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".