MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4366422389 · doi:10.1177/14614448231163284

Platformed cultural production and calibration in the Covid-19 pandemic

2023· article· en· W4366422389 on OpenAlexafffund
Jordan Foster

Bibliographic record

VenueNew Media & Society · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of CanadaGovernment of Canada
KeywordsInfluencer marketingSanctionsRevenuePandemicWork (physics)CriticismPublic relationsEconomic sanctionsSociologyBusinessMarketingSocial psychologyPsychologyCoronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)Political scienceLawEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The COVID-19 pandemic created a period of social and economic crisis that introduced two distinct problems for social media influencers. At the same time that the pandemic made their work economically precarious, it also made their work morally hazardous, as large-scale human suffering made influencers’ lifestyle promotions appear out of step with their audiences’ day-to-day experiences. How did influencers and the personnel they work with organize their labour to navigate uncertainty and avoid moral criticism? Drawing on 40 in-depth interviews with fashion influencers as well as the industry personnel they work with, I explain how influencers and those close to them respond to and combat issues of uncertainty and change during a period of crisis. I pair this interview data with a year-long online observation of influencers’ labour online. In a calibrated move from aspiration to authenticity, influencers stressed the ‘ordinary’ and ‘everyday’ qualities of their lives during the pandemic, evading moral sanctions against profit-making. Throughout, they leveraged their tentacular connections with audiences to refine content in step with shifting demand and desire online, maximizing their market reach and annual revenue.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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 score0.042
Threshold uncertainty score0.718

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.160
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.212 · 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 teacher head, 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 routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueNew Media & SocietySame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207