MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4255202451 · doi:10.32920/ryerson.14656056

Creating content, influencing democracy: situating corporate political communication between marketing and activism

2021· preprint· en· W4255202451 on OpenAlexaff
Stéphanie Hill

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicSocial Media and Politics
Canadian institutionsToronto Metropolitan UniversityYork University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDistrustPoliticsPublic relationsLegislationDemocracyCorporate communicationMarketingBusinessAdvertisingPolitical scienceCorporate social responsibilityLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This thesis investigates the commercial backlash to a contentious piece of legislation in North Carolina and considers the implications of commercial incorporation of political content on public service communications. Commercial actors have high social standing and a privileged relationship with the social platforms used to disseminate much of commercial speech. In their pursuit of direct relationships with consumers, unmediated by publishers and free of the distrust of advertisement that has often characterized consumer-marketer relations, brands have cultivated content marketing practices based on serving consumer interests. Access to analytical tools allows companies to evaluate the success of content, eventually creating an environment in which most companies feel comfortable taking political stands in a way they did not before the widespread adoption of social media. Closer examination of political speech by commercial entities reveals strategies of communication that undermine avenues for public exchange and short-circuit non-market means of protest.

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)0.008
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.016
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.041

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0080.016
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.003
Science and technology studies0.0100.026
Scholarly communication0.0170.011
Open science0.0010.010
Research integrity0.0030.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.140
GPT teacher head0.360
Teacher spread0.220 · 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.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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
Published2021
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSocial Media and Politics→French-language works237,207→