Table 3 Summary of key findings

Context of the busway

•

Accounts of events occurring pre and post the busway’s opening developed an understanding of the intervention context and how the intervention was experienced.

•

For example, contradictory attitudes towards the busway amongst the key stakeholders developed a context of limited acceptability of and perceived need for the busway.

Dynamic nature of the busway

•

The media captured the dynamic nature of the intervention including its phased completion and capacity to adapt to varying demands over time.

•

For instance, the implementation of the busway could not be represented by a clear dichotomy of ‘available’ vs. ‘unavailable’.

Idealised and lived experiences

•

The media constructed idealised portrayals of the anticipated busway in terms of its reliability, frequency, speed and value for money, which in some cases were contradicted by the impact of the busway on the existing context and people’s lived experiences.

Prioritisation of the busway over the maintenance track

•

Differential media coverage of the intervention components suggested that a lesser value was placed on promoting active travel compared with public transport.

•

This unequal distribution of discourse both reflected and contributed to the lesser priority attached by stakeholders to the maintenance track compared with the busway itself.

•

The name ‘maintenance track’ does not emphasise the opportunity for active travel.

Consumption of media content

•

Interview data supported the hypothesis that the media increased awareness of the busway and served as a frame of reference for constructing expectations and comparing experiences.

•

For those who had not used the busway, the media coverage offered an indication of how it was experienced and influenced willingness to try the busway.