Rhetorical economy: Affect, labor, and capital in transnational digital circulation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Web 3.0 informational capitalism and authoritarianism challenge our assumptions about rhetorical circulation in relation to affect, labor, and capital forces, particularly in transnationally networked publics. A new model is needed in tandem with the robust ecological model to analyze the axiological dimension of transnational digital rhetorical circulation, i.e., how rhetorics produce and accumulate what types of value as they circulate digitally. Drawing on theories of rhetorical capital and communicative labor, this article proposes a theorization of rhetorics that circulate in digitally networked publics as an economy: the changing totality and relationships of rhetorical value produced and accumulated as a result of constant interactions among digital prosumers, technologies, labor, affect, commodities, and capital. The article also seeks to recontextualize the model of rhetorical economies in a transnational context with complex circulatory conditions. The author then reads the rhetorical economy of a Chinese nationalist cyber campaign in response to the Xinjiang cotton controversy.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".