This article outlines the methodology and key findings of a media content analysis of news reporting in the Courier-Mail and Queensland Country Life on the issue of broad-scale land-clearing (BSLC) in Queensland during the period 1998–2006. The case study identifies and examines evidence-based arguments made by stakeholders in the public policy debate surrounding BSLC, including elected officials and judges, interest groups, government agencies, scientists, business owners and individuals, such as academics. In both newspapers, it was noted that throughout the period under review, arguments made on environmental grounds in favour of the policy goal of maximum immediate conservation tended to be concerned with establishing an accurate definition of the BSLC problem. However, reporting of arguments made on political and economic grounds reflected stark differences between the two newspapers. The findings of this study support observations that some participants in a contest over new policy may dispute (persistently, and regardless of previous developments) the validity of: (1) definitions of a problem; (2) proposed policy solutions; (3) matters of detail or technical application; and (4) the enactment and implementation of legislation.

中文翻译：

---

昆士兰州广泛的土地清理政策辩论，1998-2006：新闻媒体内容中基于证据的论点分析——更正

本文概述了对《信使邮报》和《昆士兰乡村生活》中关于 1998 年至 2006 年期间昆士兰州大规模土地清理 (BSLC) 问题的新闻报道的媒体内容分析的方法和主要发现。The case study identifies and examines evidence-based arguments made by stakeholders in the public policy debate surrounding BSLC, including elected officials and judges, interest groups, government agencies, scientists, business owners and individuals, such as academics. 两份报纸都指出，在整个审查期间，以环境为由提出的支持最大程度直接保护的政策目标的论点往往与建立 BSLC 问题的准确定义有关。然而，对基于政治和经济理由的论点的报道反映了两家报纸之间的明显分歧。这项研究的结果支持了以下观察：一些新政策竞赛的参与者可能会（持续地，不管以前的发展如何）质疑以下内容的有效性：（1）问题的定义；（二）提出的政策解决方案；(3) 细节或技术应用事项；(4) 立法的制定和实施。