Rethinking the role of community media in conflict transformation and peacebuilding
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 Whereas much has been written about the role community media plays in peacebuilding, emphasis is often put on participatory media models as key determinants of peace or conflict sustainability. Little is known, however, about the conditions under which such media increase or impede peace efforts due to the complex nature of conflict. Moreover, how, when, and by whom such media can be tailored to offer favorable conditions for peacebuilding at the community level remain largely unanswered questions. This article draws from Howard's ( An Operational Framework for Media and Peacebuilding , IMPACS, 2002) typology of media interventions, issue‐framing framework, and conflict transformation approach to probe the prospects of community media agency in peacebuilding at the community level. It argues that the way conflict narratives are produced, negotiated, and consumed across time and space is what provides individuals or groups with incentives for conflict or trade‐offs for peace irrespective of the stage at which a given conflict manifests itself. Overall, the reflections presented are conceptual and are intended to generate theoretical and methodological discussions around the role of community media in conflict transformation and peacebuilding at the community level.
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 | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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