MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4297380409 · doi:10.18192/cjmsrcem.v18i1.6499

Instagram as a Tool to Counter the Image of Countries as Unsafe: the Case of #LiveLoveLebanon

2022· article· en· W4297380409 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Raphaela Nehme

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Media Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMiddle East and Rwanda Conflicts
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Ottawa
Fundersnot available
KeywordsTourismDestinationsAdvertisingDestination imageTourist destinationsSocial mediaPolitical scienceSociologyGeographyBusinessLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The emergence of social media has created new means of intercultural engagement. On Instagram, there is a growing trend of travel pages and travel bloggers whose aim is to introduce and share the highlights of the destinations they travel to. Locals in these destinations also wish to portray their country positively and promote it as a tourist destination, particularly in certain countries of the Middle East where there is the added challenge of an ‘unsafe’ image to combat. This research focuses on Lebanon to find out to what extent Instagram can be considered a means to this end, and if users who come across depictions of Lebanon on Instagram perceive the country as a potential tourist destination. The study draws on Said’s conception of the ‘other’ (1978), Hall’s system of representations (1980) and Pieterse’s hybridization paradigm (1996), and it used a mixed methods approach combining surveys and semi-structured interviews with Canadian participants. Findings broadly show that while Instagram can effectively be considered a tool to counter the ‘unsafe’ image of Lebanon, and while the country may be branded as a potential tourist destination to users who come across favorable depictions of it, algorithm restrictions limit the potential for such contents to fulfill their potential as they do not always reach users who perceive Lebanon to be an ‘unsafe’ place.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.595
Threshold uncertainty score0.965

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.002
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)0.0010.000

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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.306
Teacher spread0.279 · 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 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
Published2022
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of Media StudiesSame topicMiddle East and Rwanda ConflictsFrench-language works237,207