Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT This paper investigates how our imagining of the nation has evolved from the 1600s to this day. Reviewing the well‐known analysis of Benedict Anderson, this paper carries the argument further, investigating how our imagining of our national communities has changed alongside sociopolitical, economic and technological transformations. After offering a review of Anderson's argument, this paper discusses the ways in which the emergence of mass communication and mass electronic media, notably radio and, most importantly, television, has shaped our imagination in the direction of ‘banal nationalism’ as Billig argued in 1995. Considering more recent and quite dramatic changes in our communication technologies and the emergence of social media, this paper considers how our imagination of the nation has also been reshaped. The new interactive mediatic environment offers new possibilities of imagining the national community. Such possibilities carry within them the potential for both fragmentation and rupture, as well as that for pro‐social mobilisation. This paper concludes by discussing whether this new technological environment necessarily breeds polarisation or also contains within it the seeds of depolarisation.
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 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".