Visible minority experience in the Canadian advertising industry: A case study of the racialized minority creative worker
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Issues of race and representation have gained significant consideration in relation to the creative industries and the structures of power within them. This study examines barriers to entry for racial minority creative workers in the Canadian advertising industry. As racial minorities attempt to enter an atmosphere entrenched in white privilege and power, they are met with an interconnected web of struggles that restrict them from entering spaces of influence in advertising. Drawing on concepts of cultural gatekeeping, racial valuation, shallow diversity, and self-monitoring, data from thirteen qualitative interviews have been analyzed through a narrative approach. Influenced by aspects of critical race theory, the lived experiences of participants inform this analysis and provide a new perspective on the preestablished structures of racial inequity. The findings of this study indicate that racial minority workers face an exponentially different experience than their white counterparts throughout their careers. They are forced to appease their white leadership and configure to the demands of the industry that are rooted within white ideals. The performativity of diversity additionally pushes minorities to be extremely cautious of their behaviour and demonstrate greater professional performance than their white counterparts. Due to racial perceptions of majority groups, people of colour must engage in the identity work of code-switching to assemble a balanced character of colour and whiteness. Ultimately, the systemic organizations of power are reproduced through inequitable practices that regulate the progression of racial minority workers in the Canadian advertising industry. This assists in sustaining the ideologies, values, and culture of majority groups within the advertising industry and the cultural products they produce.
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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.048 | 0.009 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.003 | 0.006 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".