MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4407108420 · doi:10.1386/jdmp_00167_1

Publishing public service media on demand: A comparative study of public service media companies’ editorial practices on their VoD services in the age of platformization

2025· article· en· W4407108420 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.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Digital Media & Policy · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDigital Games and Media
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersArts and Humanities Research Council
KeywordsPublishingService (business)BusinessPublic serviceAdvertisingPublic relationsMarketingPolitical science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article contributes to the emerging empirical research on the editorial practices of video-on-demand (VoD) publishing in European public service media (PSM). It presents results from a comparative study of the editorial practices visible on the VoDs from ten PSM companies across six countries: United Kingdom, Belgium, Poland, Italy, Canada and Denmark. The aim of the article is to map and compare the editorial practices in the ‘prime space’ of the VoD services and the ‘prime time’ of the companies’ main linear channels. The analysis is based on data from a sample week of 13–19 November 2023. The article contributes to research addressing the key issue of universality in terms of content and discusses the conceptualizations of the audience that seem to be at work in the transition towards an online PSM identity.

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)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch, Scholarly communication
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Qualitative · Consensus signal: Qualitative
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.102
Threshold uncertainty score0.999

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0020.008
Open science0.0020.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.090
GPT teacher head0.363
Teacher spread0.273 · 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