Stigma Power, Race, and Public Accountability: An Exploration of the Hard Lockdown of Public Housing in Melbourne
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explores the intersection between stigma and accountability in the context of a disaster. We draw on the notion of stigma power to explore the COVID-19 pandemic-related hard lockdown of nine public housing towers in Melbourne, Australia, in July 2020. We investigate how stigma is implicated in the construction and operationalisation of systems of public accountability in relation to this disaster. The study adopts a qualitative approach and data is collected from secondary sources (including the Victorian Ombudsman’s report, media reports and social media posts) and 16 in-depth interviews with residents and a wide range of stakeholders. Our findings highlight the complexity of stigma which attaches to public housing and its residents and shows how stigma is drawn upon to create an image of residents as a danger to the public who are not owed care and accountability but rather need to be controlled, isolated and made to account for themselves. The study also shows how residents demonstrate care and accountability to themselves through resistance and how resistance to stigma drives the demand for accountability. This study is original as it provides new insights into the intersection between stigma and accountability particularly during times of crisis.
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 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 | 0.006 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 it