MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408405824 · doi:10.22230/cjc.2018v43n4a3209

Hanging the Sin Eater: International Criminal Law’s Failure to Engage with the Role of Media in a Criminal State

2018· article· en· W4408405824 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Mark Bourrie

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Communication · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicInternational Law and Human Rights
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCriminal lawState (computer science)LawPolitical scienceCriminologySociologyComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background Mainstream news media play an important role in the political system. For instance, they can use their authoritative voices to give legitimacy to regimes. In contrast, the fringe press is easily identified by its often outrageous partisanship. Fringe media such as Julius Streicher’s Der Stürmer and Rwanda’s Radio Télévision Libre des Mille Collines usually have no credibility with non-partisan audiences. Analysis Mainstream media, because of their own credibility, can give credibility to criminal states. Analysis of the historical record shows that mainstream media escape prosecution in the rare cases where they are called to account for underpinning state criminality. Conclusions and implications This article discusses the prosecution of the fringe partisan press for acting as propagandists for criminal states, while more “credible” mainstream journalists escape prosecution.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.025
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.023
Threshold uncertainty score0.045

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.025
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0030.002
Science and technology studies0.0100.021
Scholarly communication0.0140.008
Open science0.0010.005
Research integrity0.0030.008
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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 head0.018
GPT teacher head0.271
Teacher spread0.252 · 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 designTheoretical or conceptual
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

Citations0
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of CommunicationSame topicInternational Law and Human RightsFrench-language works237,207