“Know more, know now”: a structural analysis of the re-design of CBC News, 2009-2011
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This thesis addresses the manner in which the re-design of CBC's English news service in 2009 is shaped by the broadcaster's interrelations with the journalistic, political, and economic fields. It draws on Pierre Bourdieu's concept of field theory to analyze how changes to the CBC's structure of journalistic production alters the distribution of capitals (cultural, economic, symbolic) the broadcaster possesses, and subsequently, the strategies the CBC employs to pursue its particular stakes as a public broadcaster in the journalistic field. This thesis claims that the latest round of CBC News re-structuring, into a “content company” or integrated news operation, reflects the CBC's new strategy as a public broadcaster to offer on-demand content and be interactive with audiences, as encapsulated in the re-design motto, “know more, know now” (CBC, 2009h). Further, this articulation of the CBC's renewed role functions to disavow the increased political and economic pressures on the broadcaster to be financially efficient with mandated funds and generate revenues to fund expanding operations. Thus, the CBC's articulation of its new public broadcasting role during the 2009 re-design demonstrates how the CBC refracts demands from external fields into its 'prism of interests' by balancing mandated objectives with external demands (Emirbayer & Johnson, 2008, p. 19). \n\tThe first part draws on three moments of structural transformation at the CBC since its inception in order to illustrate how the CBC, from the outset, has participated in multiple fields and its structural changes reflect that throughout its history. The second part maps out the structural changes to news production in the 2009 re-design by drawing on CBC, government, and related documents in order to show how official articulations of the re-design function to disavow political and economic pressures the broadcaster is attempting to refract into its mandate. The final part employs a case study to analyze how the “content company” news structure operates during a large-scale Canadian news event, the death of Jack Layton, including how interactive and on-demand elements are incorporated into news production.
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 | 0.032 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.007 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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".