Bibliographic record
Abstract
Public interest in media policyPluralism and diversity of the media has in the past decade been in the focus of European media policy and critical analysis.The concern was partly related to the possibility of continued competition within the media industries in view of the enduring concentration trends, but even more to the possibility of continued contribution of the pluralistic and diverse media to democracy.Beyond this focal issue, at the heart of any media policy is the forgotten question: what is the contemporary social role of the media?Do we still see communication media as social institutions expected to contribute to society and culture?At the juncture of these issues arises the idea of public interest.Changes in media and communication technologies, media industries and economies as well as in global media realities are making us revisit this question every once in a while in the swiftly changing media history.As Aufderheide (1999) points out (after analyzing the changes in the USA from the 1934 to the 1996 Communications act), public interest is at the centre of communication policy, even if the technological development in the media sector would be the first suspect for the agent of policy change.The need for substantive research into the public interest implications of media policy were highlighted strongly by William Melody (1990) two decades ago.He was concerned with ensuring that new communication technologies (at that time CATV, VCR, satellite television, ISDN, and the nascent Internet) contribute to all segments of society.His was an appeal for continued media policy in the public interest in spite of the growing diversification and proliferation in channels, program types and ownership modes already evident at that time.Melody defined public interest in relation to the "essential functions of information and communication in modern participatory democracy, that is, to provide opportunities for citizens to be informed and to be heard " (1990:29).He highlighted two public interest aspects of media programs: diversity (especially in terms of the press), and public service programming (for the PSB's) or "programming in the public interest" for commercial broadcasters.In terms of the "beneficiaries" of the pubic interest,
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 | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.011 | 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".