MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W6999844822

Domestic Violence and the Newsprint Media: A Critical Discourse Analysis of Three Canadian Newspapers in a Covid-19 Context

2022· dissertation· en· W6999844822 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueMacSphere (McMaster University) · 2022
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicIntimate Partner and Family Violence
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperCritical discourse analysisBlameNewsprintContext (archaeology)PoliticsNarrativeDiscourse analysisFrame analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper seeks to explore the way the print news media reported on issues related to domestic violence (DV) in the Greater Toronto/Hamilton Ontario area in the context of Covid-19 from March 2020 to March 2021. Specifically, I drew on three newspapers to include the Hamilton Spectator, the Toronto Star, and the Globe and Mail. This research is primarily concerned with the discourses that emerged about gender-based violence in the newsprint media during a time when people were required to stay in their homes and when access to community-based services that support women experiencing DV became increasing challenging. Using a Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) that was grounded in a feminist theoretical framework, three themes emerged as particularly dominant. These included: a) the media’s use of “victim” and “survivor” discourses, b) women’s experiences of DV and access to resources, and c) public health discourses that centered on responses to DV in light of Covid-19. This paper concluded that reinforcement of dominant narratives about the socio political and gendered landscape in which DV is reported on via newsprint media sources, depict DV as an individual rather than structural issue that shifts the blame away from historical and current day social, economic, and political forces that create the conditions in which DV occurs. Importantly, the newsprint media promote a homogenous definition of ‘woman’ thus elevating dominant DV discourses that tend to centre the experiences of white, heterosexual women and that result in silencing the voices of gender diverse and racialized women. Consequently, my research suggests that there is an ongoing need to build on existing feminist literature to critically examine DV as a systemic issue that requires a response that is inclusive of the diversity of women who experience DV, the needs for services to support a diversity of women, and to do so in ways that move away from individual solutions toward shifts in practice and policy.

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)0.007
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.015
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 score0.121
Threshold uncertainty score0.611

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0070.015
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.010
Science and technology studies0.0380.021
Scholarly communication0.0140.004
Open science0.0020.006
Research integrity0.0020.004
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

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 head0.020
GPT teacher head0.304
Teacher spread0.285 · 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
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueMacSphere (McMaster University)Same topicIntimate Partner and Family ViolenceFrench-language works237,207