Tracing the Trajectory: A Literature Review on Racism in Canadian Journalism
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Racial inequities and the lack of racial representation within Canada's journalism industry are persistent. Existing literature on the underrepresentation of Black, Indigenous or a person of colour (BIPOC) journalists in workplaces and journalism students in academia points to the need for research on the lived experiences BIPOC individuals endure in both journalism education and Canadian newsrooms. In journalism education and practice alike, BIPOC individuals brave issues of microaggressions, institutional racism and pigeonholing (Zoledziowski, 2018). The research completed for this project recounts multiple experiences of racism that journalists face in the journalism industry and shows similarities and differences in the experiences of BIPOC individuals in practice and education. Many established reporters start their careers by enrolling in journalism schools. BIPOC students face challenges of systemic racism in post-secondary education and, in addition, largely do not see their experiences and perspectives reflected in the overall curriculum. Diversity training is not widely prevalent in Canadian journalism schools and curricula is largely taught through colonial and Eurocentric lenses (Todorova, 2016). BIPOC students who have multifaceted identities, including gender, ethnicity, religion, or ability, may face additional discrimination in journalism education, in addition to microaggressions due to their race. There is also little research on the lack of BIPOC students in journalism education and a lack of official statistics on the number of BIPOC students in Canadian journalism programs. Using a scoping review of existing literature, this Major Research Paper discusses racism in the Canadian journalism landscape and identifies future explorations in BIPOC Canadian journalism research, especially focusing on BIPOC students in journalism education. This MRP may also serve as a stepping-stone for areas of future research regarding student journalists in post-secondary journalism education.
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 | 0.013 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.039 | 0.063 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.006 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| 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".