Debating Resource-Driven Development: A Comparative Analysis of Media Coverage on the Pacific Northwest LNG Project in British Columbia
Bibliographic record
Abstract
<p>In Canada, the provincial government of British Columbia has been keen on building an export-oriented liquefied natural gas (LNG) industry since 2011. This paper examines media coverage of the Pacific NorthWest LNG project (PNW), which was considered as the flagship proposal leading the BC LNG development, until its abrupt cancellation in July 2017. The paper explores the differences between public, commercial, and independent media in energy reporting by tracing how six Canadian media outlets covered the rise and fall of PNW over a 36 month period. The comparative analysis reveals that when addressing the project's cancellation, fossil fuel advocates repeatedly deployed the "jobs killed by environmentalists" argument via opinion pieces appearing in commercial newspapers. This diagnosis, however, downplayed the far-reaching impacts of falling Asian LNG market conditions prior to the cancellation. By comparison, independent media played an important role in assisting LNG opponents to communicate PNW's fragile economic basis to a wide audience. Overall, these findings shed light upon the significance of independent media in supporting diverse news accounts of energy controversies. </p>
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 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".