MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4402055780 · doi:10.4324/9781003006770-27

Podcasting and Resistance to Gender-Based Violence across Canada, the United States, and Mexico

2024· book-chapter· en· W4402055780 on OpenAlexfundaboutno aff
Zalfa Feghali

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typebook-chapter
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversity of LeicesterArts and Humanities Research CouncilUniversity of AlbertaUniversity of Minnesota
KeywordsResistance (ecology)Political scienceCriminologyPsychologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Using a comparative border studies approach, this chapter explores how podcasting has been used to examine, expose, and critique longstanding structures and crises of gender-based violence, specifically femicide and feminicide in Canada, Mexico, and the United States. As it focuses on how North American borders figure in podcasts’ discussion of gender-based violence, the chapter explains how the medium is an effective means of shedding light on the trans-border and transnational nature of gender-based violence of femicide and feminicide and argues that podcasting’s essential qualities are fundamental to its potential to expose and challenge cross-border gender-based violence in North America. The chapter analyses two podcasts, Forgotten: Women of Juárez, hosted by journalists Oz Woloshyn and Mónica Ortiz Uribe, which aired in 2020 on the iHeartMedia platform; and journalist Connie Walker’s (Cree) Missing & Murdered: Finding Cleo investigation, which aired in 2018 as a Canadian Broadcasting Corporation podcast. Each of these shows draws attention and responds to femicides in different ways, mobilizing the narrative techniques of investigative journalism alongside more context-specific and locally grounded storytelling strategies to directly engage listeners.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.906
Threshold uncertainty score0.792

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
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 head0.036
GPT teacher head0.282
Teacher spread0.246 · 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 designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreOther

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

Citations0
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicRadio, Podcasts, and Digital MediaFrench-language works237,207