MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W7010677826

Investigating municipal Access to Information via news coverage of Montreal’s housing crisis

2025· other· en· W7010677826 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University) · 2025
Typeother
Languageen
Field
Topic
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsJournalismNews mediaPoliticsWork (physics)Focus (optics)Function (biology)Thematic analysisLocal governmentNews aggregatorContent analysis
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This study seeks to reveal the role of Access to Information (ATI) and public records in local journalism by conducting a thematic analysis of 107 news media articles about Montreal’s housing crisis, and by examining original and previously released Access to Information request packages. This work highlights how local news media have covered the housing crisis thus far, with a deliberate focus on the sources and angles used, and how they might address the issue differently going forward, with increased focus on using official documents and ATI requests in the coverage. Importantly, this study focuses on Montreal’s municipal ATI system, as previous work in academia has mostly focused on either Canada’s federal ATI system or provincial/territorial systems. This study reveals that, in stories about the housing crisis, local news media have tended to favour the voices of politicians and official statements, while only a few rare outlets sporadically use ATI to deepen their reporting. This study recognizes that tight deadlines in news work and long delays in the municipal ATI system are in part responsible for local journalists’ heavy reliance on political sources and official statements. However, the result of not using ATI as a journalistic source leads to a journalism that remains at the surface level and fails to provide citizens the information they are entitled to, that would allow them to make more informed decisions about municipal policies related to housing and municipal elections. With this important function of local journalism in mind, this study suggests increased use of ATI requests in gaining a deeper understanding of complex issues that directly target citizens.

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)0.004
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.027
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.354
Threshold uncertainty score0.712

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0040.027
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0070.011
Science and technology studies0.0050.002
Scholarly communication0.0080.003
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0070.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.301
Teacher spread0.267 · 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 designObservational
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
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSpectrum Research Repository (Concordia University)→French-language works237,207→