MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W972000002 · doi:10.1163/22131418-00204012

Activism and Exception in Covering Egypt’s Uprising: A Critical Reading of the New York Times Representation of Female Protestors

2014· article· en· W972000002 on OpenAlexaff
Nermin Allam

Bibliographic record

VenueSociology of Islam · 2014
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicGender, Feminism, and Media
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOrientalismFraming (construction)Representation (politics)Gender studiesSociologyAgency (philosophy)Media studiesCritical readingCritical discourse analysisReading (process)HistoryPolitical scienceLawSocial sciencePolitics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This paper interrogates the representation of women in the NEW YORK TIMES ( nyt ) coverage of the 2011 Egyptian uprising. In it, I highlight some of the ways in which Orientalist stereotypes were often manifested in the nyt representation of female protestors. The data for this project draws upon 224 news-stories published in the nyt during the 2011 Egyptian uprising. The stories offer a detailed coverage of the popular movement between January 25 and February 19, 2011. I carry out a textual analysis of news and commentaries, and read the text through the lens of feminist and postcolonial theories. My analysis suggests that traditional Orientalist motifs of passiveness coexisted along new ones of agency in the coverage. By evoking the myth of female passiveness and framing female activism as an exception, the nyt , I suggest, assuaged the effect of women’s activism in deconstructing traditional gender and geopolitical stereotypes. In so doing, the paper contributes to exposing how Orientalist discourses are able to reflect variation and historical shifts. It also extends the postcolonial feminist insight to new cases by offering a critical reading of women’s image in a key global news paper and amidst a period of change and uncertainties.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation 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: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.511
Threshold uncertainty score0.381

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.050
GPT teacher head0.346
Teacher spread0.296 · 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 teacher head, 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
Published2014
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSociology of IslamSame topicGender, Feminism, and MediaFrench-language works237,207