MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4206052065 · doi:10.1111/socf.12782

Paint it White: Segregationist Logics in Advertising and the Electric Guitar

2022· article· en· W4206052065 on OpenAlexaff
Ali R. Chaudhary

Bibliographic record

VenueSociological Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial and Cultural Dynamics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of New Brunswick
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWhite (mutation)MasculinityGuitarConsumption (sociology)Object (grammar)ScholarshipAdvertisingSociologyGender studiesComputer scienceLawPolitical scienceSocial science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Sociologists recognize that symbolic boundaries may be activated and reinforced through the production and consumption of cultural objects. Less attention, however, has been paid to the role of advertising as an ascriptive boundary‐making mechanism in the life cycles of objects. Using the case of the electric guitar, this study examines how a cultural object‐pioneered and popularized by Black celebrity guitarists became homologous with White masculinity through the production and circulation of visual images featured in advertising materials. Data come from product catalogs circulated by the two preeminent electric guitar brands during the instrument’s large‐scale production and consumption in the United States (1955–1982). I conduct a content analysis of annual product catalogs focusing on the proportional representation of visual images of Black and White celebrity guitarists. Findings indicate that Black celebrity guitarists were rarely featured in advertising materials despite their exclusive use of both brands’ instruments. Consistent with segregationist logics embedded in modern advertising, Black celebrity guitarists were rendered non‐existent and replaced with images of White celebrity guitarists and depictions of middle‐class White masculinity. I interpret my findings as evidence of the prevalence of segregationist era logics in the advertising and construction of the electric guitar as a racialized and gendered cultural object. I conclude by discussing how this study advances recent scholarship concerning racial inequities in the consumer marketplace and the significance of ascriptive boundaries in the production and consumption of cultural objects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.236
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.286
Teacher spread0.268 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociological ForumSame topicSocial and Cultural DynamicsFrench-language works237,207