MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7079726383 · doi:10.26108/jq2c-wv37

Québec's myopic public sphere

2010· article· en· W7079726383 on OpenAlexaboutno aff

Bibliographic record

VenueAcadiaU-DEV · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicGeochemistry and Geologic Mapping
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsPublic sphereRealmCapital (architecture)Consumption (sociology)ConsumerismPopulationPrivate sphereWork (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The work of Jurgen Habermas has analysed the public sphere, a realm within which people debate. According to Habermas, the public sphere, because of structural transformations of society, has disintegrated. This sphere in which people used to debate democratically about the interests of the population has eroded, especially with the invasion of capital within culture. In fact, once people started to benefit economically from culture, the content presented to the audience was transformed from something valuable to society to something profitable to media owners. This thesis demonstrates that the rise of consumerism has played a role in making mass culture an important tool for the commoditisation of society, creating a never-ending flow of consumption items. I argue that laissez- faire economics, the system in which the communication sector navigates, inevitably leads to concentration of ownership in the media. This concentration accelerates the problems created by the invasion of capital within culture. The case study of this thesis demonstrates that Québec‟ s public sphere has become myopic, because people debate mainly about apolitical matters. I argue that the unfettered rise of conglomerates such as Quebecor has played an important role in the creation of Québec‟ s Myopic Public Sphere.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
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: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.059
Threshold uncertainty score0.431

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0110.004
Scholarly communication0.0050.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0130.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.210
Teacher spread0.198 · 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
Published2010
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAcadiaU-DEVSame topicGeochemistry and Geologic MappingFrench-language works237,207