Bridges, hoops and pools : international film co-production : the interface between culture and trade
Bibliographic record
Abstract
International film co-productions are sometimes thought of by the Americans as a form of financing providing the U.S. with the ability to sell works to its most important export market, Europe. Europe prefers thinking of it as way to provide its market with works that reflect European culture and ideals. This thesis questions the reality of such a statement, using the examples of the EU, the U.S. and Canada. The author first explains the mechanism of co-production within the framework of a presentation of the methods of film financing. Follows a twofold discussion on the current nature of international co-productions, on both the international and national levels. A considerable portion of this work examines the terms of the debate about the interplay between culture and trade. As an instrument used in the audiovisual industry, therefore strongly connected to cultural industries, international co-production is indeed an ideal model to represent the tensions existing between culture and global trade. This thesis sets international co-production up as a symbol of the interface between culture and trade. Follows a debate on the congruity of the existing global and regional trade agreements for the protection of a culture always weaker in its diversity and propagation. With the prospect of the imminent phasing out of the sectoral exemptions allowed by the GATS, the inadequacy of the NAFTA cultural exemption and current quota policy systems, what would be best to calm down the tensions between culture and trade? Three solutions are discussed here: the New International Instrument on Cultural Diversity; a powerful competitor to the American majors such as Vivendi-Universal, and the technique of co-ventures.
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
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Qualitative | medium |
| gpt | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Other About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | low |
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 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.009 | 0.015 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.022 | 0.025 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.007 |
| Research integrity | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 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, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
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".