Tout défiant envers les médias est-il un complotiste ?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
L’attention médiatique est très accaparée par une crainte de la montée des mouvements qualifiés de complotistes. Plusieurs critères de l’écosystème informationnel actuel favorisent effectivement une production et une mise en visibilité de contenus différents de ceux attendus dans l’espace public. Pour autant, la crise que traversent les autorités informationnelles institutionnelles ne saurait se résumer à ce rapport bien spécifique à la réalité qu’est la logique complotiste. Bien au contraire, les formes de contestation, de recherche de solutions alternatives ou d’indifférence aux médias pour dire le monde s’avèrent bien souvent plus variées et reposent sur un ensemble de déterminants complexes. À partir d’une enquête approfondie des conversations en ligne à propos de l’actualité au Québec, cet article propose une grille de lecture des critiques adressées aux autorités informationnelles institutionnelles qui rendent davantage compte de cette complexité.
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 | 0.008 | 0.020 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.026 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.018 | 0.014 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 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".