MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4320717420 · doi:10.3138/topia-2022-0008

About Face: Hypocrites and Outliers 
in Canadian News Coverage of Masking and Anti-Masking During the Coronavirus Pandemic

2023· article· en· W4320717420 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Hannah Dick

Bibliographic record

VenueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural Studies · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicFeminism, Gender, and Intersectionality
Canadian institutionsCarleton University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPoliticsMasking (illustration)HypocrisyLegislationSecularismFace (sociological concept)Political scienceImmigrationPublic opinionMedia studiesSociologyLawLiteratureSocial scienceArt

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The coronavirus pandemic has generated renewed public debate about different forms of masking. In this article I analyze news frames that circulated in English- language Canadian news outlets throughout 2020, performing an informal discourse analysis of coverage of Quebec’s secularism law, Bill 21, alongside coverage of two anti-mask protests held in Aylmer, Ontario. In the case of Bill 21, I argue that the predominant frame that shaped coverage was one of hypocrisy, which foregrounded the discriminatory nature of the legislation but obscured the Christian cultural politics otherwise embedded in the law. In the case of the Aylmer marches, I argue that news coverage centered on the role of the religious outlier, particularly through attention to outspoken Church of God Restoration pastor Rev. Henry Hildebrandt. This frame amplified Hildebrandt’s political statements but downplayed the more quotidian role of conservative Christianity in shaping some anti-mask sentiment. In both cases I argue that attending to the Christian cultural politics which were obscured by dominant news frames can help us better understand the persistent role of religion in shaping public discourse.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.014
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: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score0.476

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.014
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.009
Science and technology studies0.0190.010
Scholarly communication0.0100.003
Open science0.0010.004
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.082
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.275 · 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

Citations2
Published2023
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueTOPIA Canadian Journal of Cultural StudiesSame topicFeminism, Gender, and IntersectionalityFrench-language works237,207