MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210304780 · doi:10.1177/14614448221074705

Framing Indigenous protest in the online public sphere: A comparative frame analysis

2022· article· en· W4210304780 on OpenAlexaff
Pascal Lupien, Adriana Rincón, Andrés Lalama, Gabriel Chiriboga

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Media & Society · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsUniversity of TorontoAthabasca UniversityBrock University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFraming (construction)IndigenousFrame analysisSocial movementSocial mediaSociologyPublic relationsPublic sphereHegemonyPolitical scienceMedia studiesContent analysisSocial sciencePoliticsLawGeography

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Indigenous social movement organizations are increasingly using social media to engage in strategic framing, a dynamic discursive process that seeks to attribute meaning to events and circumstances. But there remains a gap in our knowledge with respect to the impact of social media on the capacity of Indigenous actors to engage in frame competition in the virtual world. Based on a comparative frame analysis of online content in three Latin American countries where Indigenous organizations have recently engaged in large-scale protest, we ask to what extent the frames generated by Indigenous actors on social media are reflected in the online public sphere. We examine how their protest action is framed by Indigenous organizations themselves, the media, and government agencies. We find that social media do provide an outlet for Indigenous actors to disseminate counter-hegemonic frames. But state and media actors do not engage with Indigenous frames disseminated over social media, and their messages do not change the tone or direction of online discourse.

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)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.200
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.003
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.098
GPT teacher head0.362
Teacher spread0.264 · 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 designQualitative
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

Citations5
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Media & SocietySame topicSocial Media and PoliticsFrench-language works237,207