MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4391820584 · doi:10.46539/gmd.v6i1.447

Forms of Historical Oblivion and Figures of Silence in Commemorative Practices of the Black Lives Matter Movement: A Comparative Analysis of Media Discourses in English-Speaking Countries

2024· article· en· W4391820584 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Андрей Александрович Линченко

Bibliographic record

VenueGalactica Media Journal of Media Studies · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldArts and Humanities
TopicRhetoric and Communication Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSilenceMovement (music)HistoryLiteratureLinguisticsArtAestheticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The Black Lives Matter (BLM) social movement has emerged as a prominent challenge to the principles and values of contemporary societies. Concurrently, the practices of cancel culture extend to the historical past as well. The primary objective of this article is to conduct a comparative analysis of forms of historical forgetting and figures of silence within the commemorative practices of BLM, as depicted in media discourses across the English-speaking countries. Making use of the critical discourse analysis methodology of N. Fairclough and S. Jäger, this study analyzes the discursive aspects of monument cancellations and key figures of silence in the media portrayal of BLM commemorative practices in the USA, Canada, the UK, and Australia. The research reveals that, despite the unique characteristics of media discourses in Australia and Canada, particularly concerning the memory of indigenous peoples, the canceling practices in the countries examined exhibit similar features. These include general forms of oblivion associated with the formation of a new identity, as outlined by P. Connerton, and the use of forgetting as a weapon, as described by A. Assmann, in the quest for symbolic capital. This study identifies and examines key figures of silence within BLM as a community of memory, including a-historical perspective of colonial era events, disproportionate focus on selected cancellation facts, invocation of collective guilt, silence over morally questionable traits of the oppressed, absence of a constructive program linking past and future, and unchecked emotional expression regarding the past.

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)0.002
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 score0.056
Threshold uncertainty score0.616

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.002
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.089
GPT teacher head0.343
Teacher spread0.253 · 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

Citations3
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueGalactica Media Journal of Media StudiesSame topicRhetoric and Communication StudiesFrench-language works237,207