ArticleGlobalization and health2026
Exploitation or economic prosperity: corporate activities and Aboriginal self-determination in media discourse.
Article in Globalization and health, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe political and regulatory environment in which people live can have profound impacts on health and wellbeing through practices that prioritise commercial development and interest over public health. For Aboriginal People, this is further undermined through corporate influence over Aboriginal autonomy, political and social participation, cultural preservation, economic and land control and, free prior and informed consent and decision-making capacity over their interests, referred to as self-determination.
methodsThis study applies a content analysis to understand the intersection of this issue within media discourse focused on the Northern Territory of Australia. Articles were located through Factiva and Newsbank searches targeting commercial activities from the extractive resource, alcohol, and food industries that impact Aboriginal People and/or Communities from 2015 to 2025.
resultsOne hundred and sixty-one articles were included in the analysis. The dominant narrative identified in the media articles focused on the economic contributions commercial development provided to Aboriginal Peoples (more commonly found in commercial news outlets and trade magazines), while a prominent counter-narrative focused on harm to Country and failures to consult Traditional Owners (more common in articles by the public broadcaster and Indigenous-owned media). Our findings challenge the notion of a single-victim narrative by illustrating how multiple stakeholders (i.e. industry, government, media, and at times civil society) collectively influence public discourse, which can either hinder or promote self-determination. Further, centring self-determination requires a suspension of assumptions about what is best for Aboriginal Peoples.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.