MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4411910373 · doi:10.31885/her.1.2.013

A Socio-Cultural Analysis of Romanian News from the 18th Century to Digital Era

2025· article· en· W4411910373 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mihaela Mihalea

Bibliographic record

VenueHelsinki Romanian Studies Journal · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicPhilippine History and Culture
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRomanianPolitical scienceLinguisticsPhilosophy

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

When Marshall McLuhan wrote in his 1964 book Understanding the Media: The Extensions of Man that ‘the medium is the message’, the Canadian communication theorist described the role that the new technologies of the time – radio and television – played in shaping social interactions, communication, and the media itself. For decades, scholars have researched how radio and television have influenced news content. However, in the early 2000s their attention shifted towards another medium: the digital environment. From blogs to digital media outlets or social media platforms – and more recently, artificial intelligence – the role of the digital environment as ‘the medium’ that shapes information has become the focus of contemporary inquiry in both the social sciences and communication research. In this paper, we conduct a socio-cultural analysis of Romanian news coverage from a reader’s perspective, investigating news discourse as the convergence of cultural trends, societal shifts, and economic and technological developments. This inquiry is grounded on the premise that a diachronic examination of news coverage can reveal how media discourse has evolved over years, reflecting underlying socio-cultural dynamics as well as economic and technological transformations. To explore this, the study analyses a corpus of news articles published in Adevărul, one of Romania’s oldest newspapers.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.005
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 score0.011
Threshold uncertainty score0.032

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.005
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.007
Science and technology studies0.0040.005
Scholarly communication0.0040.002
Open science0.0000.002
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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 head0.026
GPT teacher head0.330
Teacher spread0.304 · 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

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueHelsinki Romanian Studies JournalSame topicPhilippine History and CultureFrench-language works237,207