Locating Buzz and Liveness: The Role of Geoblocking and Co-presence in Virtual Film Festivals
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The sudden and near-complete move of festivals into the online space in 2020 complicated our understanding of the “there” and “then” involved in film festival participation. Experiencing festivals in lockdown (often from domestic spaces), “taking part” in these virtual events had the potential to dramatically expand the points of access. Although this approach was taken early with the YouTube-based We Are One global film festival, for the vast majority of single-festival-run online events access was limited to specific geographic areas through geoblocking technology. This chapter examines the function of geofenced access in virtual and hybrid virtual/real-world film festivals. It poses the question: what are the benefits for festivals in enforcing territoriality and place-boundedness in the de-territorialized world of online media? Looking to the importance of embodied co-presence and networked publics in existing understandings of liveness, buzz, and value creation at festivals, we interrogate the role of “place” in defining festival prestige and influence. We ask, if the mechanisms of value creation linked to the physical spectacle and viral spread of buzz at festivals are disrupted, will the film festival experience still be seen as valuable? And what might that mean for the future of festivals and their study?
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.
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 | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it