MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4405437727 · doi:10.1080/17512786.2024.2441282

Comparing News Coverage of Refugees in South Korea: Media Outlet Types and Diversity Patterns

2024· article· en· W4405437727 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournalism Practice · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicAsian Culture and Media Studies
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDiversity (politics)RefugeePolitical scienceAdvertisingJournalismNews mediaGeographyMedia studiesBusinessSociologyLaw

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study examines how news diversity varies across different types of news outlets and explores the underlying factors that contribute to those differences by analyzing coverage from a public broadcaster, 24-hour news channels, and commercial news channels in South Korea. Through framing analysis and critical discourse analysis (CDA), this study examines how different media covered the recent arrivals of two distinct refugee groups—Yemeni and Afghan—focusing on the diversity of news framing, sources, formats, as well as their lexical choices and discourses. The findings suggest that, in addition to their political orientation, the ownership and operational models of media outlets influence their news content in South Korea. A well-resourced public broadcaster (KBS) demonstrates greater diversity in sources and content, while rolling news channels contribute to news diversity by employing more varied news formats. More fundamentally, this study highlights that news discourses are shaped by broader social contexts, such as nationalist and neoliberal perspectives on refugees.

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.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.600
Threshold uncertainty score0.340

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
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 head0.042
GPT teacher head0.335
Teacher spread0.293 · 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