Confronting Skam in Each of us in the Critical Media Studies and Cultural Trauma Theories
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This paper will conduct a TV series from Norway called Skam (Shame) as a case study and discuss its impact by utilizing critical studies of media and cultural trauma theories. Simply put, this paper aims to illustrate that Skam depicts the shame arisen from mythical norm labeled by the dominant narratives under the mainstream media and understands the true meaning of healing for traumas in two aspects based on cultural trauma theories. For one, trauma is intersectional and therefore varying from every individual. For another, the mainstream power-over approach cannot help to heal trauma, but only the person herself/himself can be the one to deal with own relationship and confront with the truth. Lastly, this paper will bring up a rebuttal to criticize the drawback of mainstream media to the paradigm shift of understanding cultural trauma theory.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.037 | 0.031 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.018 | 0.111 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.023 | 0.045 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.021 |
| Research integrity | 0.011 | 0.014 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".