MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4311701769 · doi:10.1080/23268743.2022.2139288

Tabloid porn in Quebec

2022· article· en· W4311701769 on OpenAlexaffabout
Will Straw

Bibliographic record

VenuePorn Studies · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPsychology
TopicSexuality, Behavior, and Technology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNarrativeNewspaperGossipCharacter (mathematics)HistoryLiteratureArtSociologyMedia studiesPsychologySocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, the Canadian region of Quebec saw a proliferation of tabloid newspapers, of uniform dimensions, covering a wide range of sensational genres (such as crime and celebrity gossip). Increasingly explicit content of a sexual character cut across these genres, marking each of these genres with elements of the pornographic. At the same time, a number of tabloid papers emerged devoted exclusively to sexual content, typically offering softcore photographic imagery of nude bodies and sexual activity which accompanied journalistic narratives (of variable veracity) chronicling sexual behaviour. The generalization of the tabloid form, this article suggests, has had particular effects on the ways in which these papers have survived. While, on the one hand, the tabloid form and use of cheap newsprint materials have contributed to a sense of the valuelessness of these papers, the manner in which the pornographic is very often ‘hidden’ within other sensational genres has allowed many of these papers to survive in contexts of preservation from which they might otherwise be expelled.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.044
Threshold uncertainty score0.184

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.003
Science and technology studies0.0070.001
Scholarly communication0.0020.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0440.001

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 head0.084
GPT teacher head0.394
Teacher spread0.310 · 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
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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePorn StudiesSame topicSexuality, Behavior, and TechnologyFrench-language works237,207