Representations of the Quebec nation through reactions to Bills 21 and 96: an analysis of editorials and Op-eds in English-language media
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article examines the representations of the Quebec nation in English-language media, specifically focusing on editorials and Op-eds which discuss Bill 21 An Act Respecting the Laicity of the State and Bill 96 An Act Respecting French, the Official and Common Language of Quebec. The study explores the perspectives expressed by members of the dominant English-speaking group in response to these nation-building policies introduced by Quebec public officials between 2019 and 2023. Specifically, it asks: How do editorials and Op-eds in established English-language newspapers represent the Quebec nation in response to Bill 21 and 96? In doing so, the research uncovers how the Quebec nation and its nation-building enterprises are portrayed in the media by examining four established newspapers: the Globe and Mail, the Winnipeg Free Press, the Montreal Gazette, and the Calgary Herald. Mobilizing a qualitative and inductive critical content analysis approach, it highlights core common themes and key normative and regional variations in the perspective advanced by the media outlets.
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 | 0.006 | 0.019 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.006 | 0.007 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.011 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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 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".