Securitizing Communication: On the Indeterminacy of Participant Roles in Online Journalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article takes Judith T. Irvine’s insights about the indeterminacy of participant roles and interpretive frameworks to explore how the increased use of social media in journalism leads to new quandaries for political actors. The dialogics of distributing or amalgamating participant roles provide for a particularly tricky domain of maneuver for journalists in India and Israel, where rightwing leaders seek to control news that disseminates rapidly on the currents of social media. Journalists have long sought to avoid becoming the story themselves, as part of claiming liberal positions that distinguish the reported events from their representation. It considers the current attempt to clamp‐down on social media use by journalists as a securitization of communication, where the very journalistic utterance is used by ruling politicians to make the journalist, or potentially the news media more generally, into a threat to public security. However, even such policing can be too slow. This article thus also considers how outraged publics become an important aspect of policing social media.
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 | 0.059 | 0.083 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.101 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.038 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.016 |
| Research integrity | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
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.
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".