Defining media speech effectiveness: A case of Ukrainian president Zelenskyy's addresses to national parliaments
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
The paper argues that effectiveness of media speeches, i.e., their ability to influence the addressees, largely rests on national prototypes, representing cultural entities and historic events. The national prototypes are clear and accessible, resonating with the addressees' values, attitudes, and beliefs. The article analyzes rhetorical effectiveness of Ukrainian president's addresses delivered at the beginning of the Russian-Ukrainian full-scale war to parliaments of seven states: Poland, USA, Canada, Germany, Italy, Japan and Greece. Volodymyr Zelenskyy appeals to the target audiences' national prototypes representing events or cultural entities correlating with Ukraine's current plight. It is found that with respect to the similarity to the national prototypes of other countries the arguments employed in Zelenskyy’s speeches fall into three types: direct, implicit, and gradual. The most effective is direct reference to prototypes at the global or national levels of the listeners' worldviews. Less effective are implicit arguments left for the addressee to be inferred like any other implicature. The least effective are gradual arguments based on presuppositions about some commonly shared information: they modify the existing national prototypes with reference to the present or future which is not always accepted by the audience.
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 | 0.001 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 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