In search of the (Black) international: <i>The Black Scholar</i> and the challenge to communication and media studies
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract In the 1970s, the journal The Black Scholar (TBS) published two special issues largely under-read in communication studies, titled “Black Media I” and “Black Media II.” The lack of engagement in these special issues by communication scholars represents not merely disciplinary differences but it also signifies different trajectories that both fields take on Marxism. Communication studies would take Europe as its starting point, while Black studies would not dismiss Europe, but would take the Third World as its point of departure. In the process, media and communication analysis in TBS holds more critical potential than what currently exists in communication studies approaches to both Blackness and Marxism. Using a sociology of knowledge approach, I argue that the place to start a wholistic, Marxist, Black studies analysis of communication begins not in communication studies, but in Black studies, which TBS’s special issues are representative of.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.017 | 0.024 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.040 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.020 | 0.020 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.010 |
| Research integrity | 0.007 | 0.016 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".