MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7001913452

Mainstream Media Portrayal of Banishment and Nation-Imposed Punishment

2024· article· en· W7001913452 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University) · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBusiness, Management and Accounting
TopicIntellectual Property and Patents
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMainstreamIndigenousAgency (philosophy)State (computer science)ColonialismPunishment (psychology)IgnoranceIdeology
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

“In a traditional village, we wouldn’t have a teepee with no door on it and throw somebody in there. We wouldn’t cast them out, because banishment meant death. What we had to do was restore relationships” – Ryan Beardy (Thorpe, 2022).\nThe following project examines the representation of Indigenous traditions, customs, and issues in Canadian mainstream media. Specifically, this project is interested in the portrayal of banishment as an Indigenous practice in Canadian mainstream news outlets. This project is based on an interpretive paradigm informed by grounded theory and concepts of media framing, postcolonialism, settler colonialism and restorative justice. Nineteen Canadian mainstream media articles discussing banishment were selected through the database Factiva which were then coded and analysed. The results of this analysis showed four key themes that will contribute to the current literature on Indigenous issues portrayal in settler-colonial mainstream media: (1) an ideological distinction between western settler and Indigenous conceptions of banishment; (2) erasure of Indigenous ways of knowing from media coverage of Indigenous practices; (3) the challenges of using banishment as punishment or crime prevention in a modern, industrialised landscape; and (4) how the Canadian state has leveraged media to promote the myth of Indigenous self- governance and what I call the Façade of Indigenous Agency (FIA). The FIA is, what I argue to be, a propaganda technique employed by the Canadian state to smooth over tensions between settler-Canadians and Indigenous peoples living in Canada as well as between the state itself and Indigenous peoples.\nThis work contributes to the decolonization of media and literature by shedding light on how colonizing narratives operate through mainstream media. As expanded on in this project, the current literary landscape and historic account of Canada’s past is deeply entrenched with colonization and imperial thought. As such, it is important to examine the ways in which these detrimental ideologies are exist and are reinforced through mainstream media. Therefore, the decolonization of the media and discussions of media’s strengthening of western values is imperative as failing to do so will further silence Indigenous voices and stories. If Canada’s goal of decolonization and reconciliation is true, the state should be quite concerned with the portrayal of Indigenous culture as well as the Façade of Indigenous Agency.

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)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
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 score0.656
Threshold uncertainty score0.692

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0050.005
Science and technology studies0.0090.009
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.002
Research integrity0.0010.002
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 head0.048
GPT teacher head0.195
Teacher spread0.147 · 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
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScholars Commons (Wilfrid Laurier University)Same topicIntellectual Property and PatentsFrench-language works237,207