Greater Britain and the Great War: British and New Zealand official propaganda in the First World War
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Propaganda of the First World War has been a persistent area of interest for historians. The national focus of much of the historiography of the war has, however, left significant gaps in understanding. This thesis examines an important area of elision: propaganda between Britain and the settler Dominions of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, and Newfoundland, which this thesis terms ‘Greater British Propaganda.’ British and Dominion propaganda campaigns during the war operated in a distinct cultural space and context. Greater British propaganda is not simply a grouping of several distinct national campaigns, but a collaborative, transnational, co-creative process. It was a product of the particular cultural, political, social, and operational dynamics of Greater Britain, under the pressures of war. These dynamics formed a distinct type of cultural interaction, utilising a shared cultural language, and forged through particular dynamics of ‘co-creation,’ which encompassed collaboration, exchange, adaptation, and competition. Understanding the interaction of British and Dominion propaganda efforts during the war in this way reveals aspects that have gone ignored, or which make little sense, when viewed through a national – or colonial nationalist – lens. This thesis uses the relationship between Britain and New Zealand to reveal these wider dynamics, and is arranged in six case studies, showing different aspects of propaganda creation and exchange. By exploring ‘Greater British propaganda’ as a distinct topic, and the dynamics of ‘co- creation’ within it, this thesis redresses the limitations of historiography of both wartime propaganda, and colonial nationalist histories of the war. The community of Britain and the Dominions was a real historical community with particular dynamics, worthy of distinct historiographical attention. Instead of treating Greater Britain as just an idea, this thesis contributes to scholarship that rightly sees it as an important, lived cultural, social, economic, and political community.
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 | 0.003 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.010 | 0.013 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 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 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".