MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210577035 · doi:10.5406/jofolympstud.2.2.0027

The Coca-Cola Games: Marketing Legacies of the Atlanta Olympic Games

2021· article· en· W4210577035 on OpenAlexaff
Dana Ellis, Becca Leopkey

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Olympic Studies · 2021
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSport and Mega-Event Impacts
Canadian institutionsLaurentian University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsAtlantaMarketingAdvertisingPolitical sciencePublic relationsSociologyHistoryBusinessMetropolitan areaArchaeology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The 1996 Summer Olympic Games in Atlanta represented a turning point in the commercial orientation of the Olympics. While arguably a commercial success, the Atlanta Games were, and continue to be, heavily criticized for their overly commercial nature. Now, more than twenty years after the Atlanta Games, this article retrospectively examines their long-term marketing legacies. Employing a qualitative case design built from a detailed document analysis using a combination of historical and contemporary sources, this article identifies key marketing and organizational events, circumstances, strategies, and challenges of the Atlanta Games and discusses how they have arguably impacted the future course of Olympic marketing and sponsorship in an effort to expand knowledge and understanding of event management-related legacies.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.412
Threshold uncertainty score0.734

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
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 head0.050
GPT teacher head0.348
Teacher spread0.299 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
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

Citations1
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Olympic StudiesSame topicSport and Mega-Event ImpactsFrench-language works237,207