Bibliographic record
Abstract
This dissertation studies Canadian campus radio broadcasting and its relationship to the circulation of local music. I examine three campus stations in two cities and one town of varying size, population, and location. These stations include CHMA in Sackville, New Brunswick, CKUW in Winnipeg, Manitoba, and CiTR in Vancouver, British Columbia. Following extensive analysis of policy documents and station-produced texts, as well as interviews with staff members, volunteers, and local musicians, I argue that a campus radio station does not simply respond to federal broadcasting regulation by ensuring programming differs from what is available on commercial and public radio. Rather, there is self-awareness throughout the sector that is decidedly attuned to local music. In each locality, numerous cultural institutions, including campus stations, work together to support local and independent music. The histories of these three stations illustrate the various paths taken in order to acquire FM radio licenses, extending from university campuses to also serve surrounding communities. The ways in which a station represents its community falls somewhere between how community representation is defined by a station mandate, and the process by which communities are imagined by campus radio practitioners. Individuals are connected to a segment of an overall music scene through a shared taste culture for which content is produced. A tension emerges between the taste and expertise of a practitioner or programmer and the ideal goal of fully representing his or her community. Despite instances of exclusion and hierarchies of taste, however, the promotion of music that is propelled by cultural status circumvents the purely economic model ingrained in commercial radio, producing alternative values and methods for circulating music.
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 imitationNot 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.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.035 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.023 | 0.001 |
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.
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".