MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4239551463 · doi:10.4324/9780203134504-11

Limited Horizons (inc.): access, democracy and technology in community television in Canada

2002· book-chapter· en· W4239551463 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Herbert Pimlott

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicICT Impact and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDemocracyPolitical scienceTelecommunicationsMedia studiesSociologyEngineeringLawPolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When community access television1 was launched more than twenty years ago, it set imaginations afire with its utopian promises: ordinary people communicating directly with one another and with government, reversing the traditional top-down command model of both communications and government. It was the convergence of technology and demands for social change which launched community access TV as a viable, democratic alternative to the older hierarchical, authoritarian forms of government and communications: interest turned from the ‘global village’ to ‘electronic town hall democracy’ (Dolan 1984). However, as with the promise of every new media technology this century, community access TV also promised to democratise the process of government through citizen participation in direct communication with the powerful, vested interests in society. Somewhat paradoxically, it was a Canadian government agency which initiated the process, institutionalising access from the top down, while in the US, a more complex and contradictory development took place which included grassroots organising.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesScience and technology studies
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.989
Threshold uncertainty score0.520

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0060.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0240.002

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.224
Teacher spread0.206 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations0
Published2002
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicICT Impact and Policies→French-language works237,207→