ABSTRACT Shark attacks have increased globally and are one of the most widely reported human-wildlife conflicts. Reflecting global trends, the number of recorded attacks has increased in Australian waters. Whether positively or negatively affected, stakeholders potentially often pressure authorities to mitigate economic and human risks when developing shark management policies. This article used discourse analysis to review how attitudes toward management approaches were attributed in Australian newspapers to a range of stakeholders. The most frequently attributed stakeholders were journalists and public office holders; victims, commercial operators, and scientists were least attributed. Although most measures were portrayed as supported by a majority of stakeholders, there was apparent misalignment between reported public and policymaker attitudes, especially regarding lethal control. Despite the ramifications (e.g., social, biological) of shark management and policymaking, reporting of science-informed facts and use of scientists to inform debate were low. Opportunities exist for increased engagement among scientists, journalists, and policymakers.

中文翻译：

---

新闻媒体描绘了利益相关者对澳大利亚鲨鱼管理的态度

摘要 鲨鱼袭击在全球范围内有所增加，是最广泛报道的人类与野生动物冲突之一。反映全球趋势的是，澳大利亚水域记录的袭击事件数量有所增加。无论是正面影响还是负面影响，利益相关者都可能在制定鲨鱼管理政策时向当局施压，要求其减轻经济和人类风险。本文使用话语分析来回顾澳大利亚报纸如何将管理方法的态度归因于一系列利益相关者。最常归因于利益相关者的是记者和公职人员；受害者、商业经营者和科学家的责任最少。尽管大多数措施被描述为得到大多数利益相关者的支持，报道的公众和决策者的态度明显不一致，尤其是在致命控制方面。尽管鲨鱼管理和政策制定会产生影响（例如，社会、生物学），但对科学事实的报道和使用科学家来为辩论提供信息的情况很少。科学家、记者和政策制定者之间有更多机会参与。