Virtual communities and the challenge of connecting with audiences
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The first communication studies were born flawed by the obsession to control the behavior of audiences. However, as the North American school of communication consolidated, they understood that there were social components that influenced the response of broadcasters and that the media could exert an overall influence with the rest of the social institutions. The media of the 20th century, designed for mass communication, could not fulfill the dreams of a hypodermic theory that ensured that every member of the audience was “attacked” by the media message. Digital social networks have come to revolutionize every aspect of modern society. Now, the messages arrive in a personalized way to each subject of communication, and artificial intelligence dominates the production of content. This paper proposes a review from the classical theory of networks to the particularities of digital social networks. In addition, it approaches the virtual community as a way to create niches of resistance in the cultural struggle, through the segmentation of audiences that allows to achieve a connection between audiences and the posts published by the media, in this specific case, the newspaper Vanguardia.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.008 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".