MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W7161838329 · doi:10.82308/34179

Journalists organize the Thomson newspaper chain: A labour union standpoint to news organizations

2018· dissertation· en· W7161838329 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Errol Salamon

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typedissertation
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsNewspaperCorporationMonopolyOligopolyGovernment (linguistics)Trade unionControl (management)Labor relations

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this dissertation, I outline a history of the labour union organizing efforts of journalists at the Thomson Newspapers chain in Canada from 1963 to 1995. Such organizing efforts provide an entry point into examining control over employment conditions in the newspaper industry. To undertake this study, I develop an analytical framework that I call a “labour union standpoint to news organizations” and a “labour union standpoint methodology.” I conduct a historical and labour union standpoint analysis of nine labour organizing campaigns, situating them within their broader political, economic, and social-historical contexts. I draw on union archival documents, newspaper content, corporate and government documents, and a critical review of the published body of literature. Between 1963 and 1995, Thomson adopted a long-term strategy of vertical growth, expanding from radio broadcasting and newspapers into other media. The corporation also adopted a strategy of horizontal growth, building a newspaper chain through acquisitions, and typically obtained a monopoly or oligopoly in the markets in which it operated. Thomson consistently had double-digit profit margins and was among the “big three” newspaper chains in Canada with regard to number of daily newspapers owned, share of total daily newspaper circulation, or share of total revenues. In response, Thomson journalists organized labour unions to protect their employment conditions. Accordingly, I consider the labour organizing tactics that journalists’ unions adopted to “bite back” at the corporation and the communication tools that they used to facilitate those tactics.My analysis reveals that journalists’ unions contested and negotiated control over employment conditions within news organizations. The outcomes of union organizing efforts were contingent upon the local circumstances of the journalists, unions, and management at a particular newspaper within the chain. While journalists’ union organizing campaigns were sometimes unsuccessful, journalists were more successful when they focused on building bridges with community members rather than developing communication tools such as strike newspapers. Some journalists’ unions challenged the established social relations and advanced social transformation by mobilizing massive community support, connecting their workplace struggles to broader social issues, and creating publicity campaigns to communicate these struggles to the public.

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)0.005
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.011
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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.305
Threshold uncertainty score0.606

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0050.011
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0060.007
Science and technology studies0.0260.022
Scholarly communication0.0200.006
Open science0.0010.003
Research integrity0.0020.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0050.001

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 head0.017
GPT teacher head0.321
Teacher spread0.303 · 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
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicMedia Studies and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207