MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406851990 · doi:10.1080/14680777.2025.2453438

Feminization of cultural work: the making of a gendered, precarious writing workforce in the South Korean broadcasting industry

2025· article· en· W4406851990 on OpenAlexaff
Hoyoung Kim

Bibliographic record

VenueFeminist Media Studies · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsFeminization (sociology)WorkforceWork (physics)PrecarityBroadcasting (networking)SociologyGender studiesPolitical scienceEngineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Television writers’ work is considered women’s work in the context of the South Korean broadcasting industry in that almost nine out of ten of the more experienced writers in this industry are women. Using a feminist political economy approach, this article investigates how women became the overwhelming majority of television writers in South Korea during the 1980s and 1990s, and how this gendering process is connected with the precarization of labour in the South Korean broadcasting industry. The article describes how, by the end of the 20th century, the South Korean broadcasting companies reorganized and expanded a writing workforce that formerly wrote scripts for fiction programs into a gendered, precarious workforce that performed diverse duties across genres. This research further develops the concept of feminization of labour for understanding the precariousness workers have experienced and contributes to our understanding of the intersection of gender and labour issues in cultural industries.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.010
Threshold uncertainty score0.021

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0100.013
Scholarly communication0.0060.003
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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 head0.132
GPT teacher head0.372
Teacher spread0.240 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designQualitative
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations1
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFeminist Media StudiesSame topicCultural Industries and Urban DevelopmentFrench-language works237,207