How Global "Big Media" May Conquer the "New Media" Environment in Canada: A Critical Investigation of CRTC Decisions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Although new media have the potential to improve some of the chronic problems of Canada's media system, the political economy of communication demonstrates that under so-called "free market" conditions, it is often large media conglomerates that benefit the most. This thesis investigates how a new media policy arrangement that is favourable to traditional broadcasting and telecommunications interests is justified and framed by the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission (CRTC), and how alternatives, including new media for an improved public sphere, are marginalized from the debate. A Critical Discourse Analysis was performed on policy texts relevant to two case studies--the CRTC's 1999 "new media" decision and the 2005 licensing of satellite radio. The results illustrate how consent for a "hands-off' regulatory approach, one that functions in the interests of transnational media conglomerates, is constructed within the hegemonic discourses and myths of neoliberal ideology.
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 | 0.011 | 0.018 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.052 | 0.037 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.019 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".