Le logement à Montréal sous l'angle des discours de crise sur Instagram : convergences et conflits au sein d'un paysage « critique » prédominant
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Selon un grand pan de la littérature anglo-saxonne, la construction sociale de la « crise » du logement tend à reconduire des logiques néolibérales véhiculées par des figures d’autorité. Ce mémoire propose de décentrer cette compréhension dominante en explorant sur les réseaux sociaux la pluralité de discours sur la « crise du logement » à Montréal. Bien que Montréal se distingue dans le contexte nord-américain par sa forte culture locative, elle n’échappe pas aux dynamiques structurelles qui fragilisent les conditions de logement à travers le pays. Ainsi, je tente d’illuminer des potentialités contre-hégémoniques ainsi que des angles morts pouvant offrir une compréhension plus complète du logement et de la construction de sa crise. À travers l’analyse de discours de 154 publications Instagram entre 2023 et 2024, une typologie d’acteurs et de discours est proposée dans ce travail. Plusieurs discours dominants dans la littérature sont marginaux, voire absents dans le cas étudié. Plutôt, on remarque une vague de mobilisation catalysée par le projet de loi 31, remettant en question un système de contrôle dysfonctionnel et la primauté du droit de propriété sur le droit au logement. Face à une reconnaissance généralisée des effets de la spéculation, un intérêt commun se dessine autour de la démarchandisation du logement, guidé par divers éléments de l’héritage politique et socioculturel montréalais. Un regard pluraliste met cependant en lumière des conflits persistants, révélant des approches divergentes du processus de démarchandisation influencées par des barrières structurelles et par la continuation de certaines pratiques de gouvernance. According to a large body of literature in the Anglosphere, the social construction of the “housing crisis” tends to reproduce neoliberal measures driven by authority figures. This thesis seeks to decenter that dominant understanding by exploring social media discourses on the “housing crisis” in Montreal. While Montreal stands out in the North American context for its strong rental culture, it experiences the same structural dynamics that undermine housing conditions across the country. This research tries to uncover the potential of counter-hegemonic discourses as well as blind spots that may advance a more comprehensive understanding of housing and the formation of its “crisis”. Through a discourse analysis of 154 Instagram posts published between 2023 and 2024, this work proposes a typology of actors and discourses surrounding the housing crisis in Montreal. Several dominant discourses in the literature remain marginal or altogether absent in the studied case. Instead, the research finds a wave of mobilization in reaction to the provincial government’s bill 31, challenging both Quebec’s dysfunctional tenant protection and rent control system as well as the primacy of property rights over the right to housing. Amid widespread resistance against speculation, the study reveals a common interest around the decommodification of housing, shaped by various elements of Montreal’s political and sociocultural heritage. However, a pluralist perspective brings to light enduring tensions, revealing divergent decommodification approaches that are influenced by structural barriers and inherited governance practices.
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 | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.013 | 0.018 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.013 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
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.
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".