"'The research tells us that there is an increased risk of ‘contagion’ with suicide where graphic images are posted,' [Reidenberg] said. But where to draw the line between acceptable and taboo content is difficult, all the more so for a company with hundreds of millions of users posting content: 'Just the photo itself, as graphic as it is, just the image, we can see lots of that online.'"I find that a bit of a cop-out. A solution that is not a solution. One that does not answer the question originally posed in the grab for the article, "How can news media & social media work to stem copycat suicides, and provide a community for loved ones to grieve and support each other??"
Does this "non-solution" then exemplify the need for more or a continuation of education in regards to prevention especially in regards to our returning service members?
__
In “The Werther Effect,” Phillips was challenging Emile Durkheim’s longstanding assertion that imitative suicide was not a thing. Modern research suggests more and more that Durkheim was wrong, that Phillips is right, and—as of this past week—that specific modes of media make the Werther Effect possible.
It now appears that emulative suicide’s principal drive is not glamour but rather a sense of proximity to the death, a vivid identification with the small details. In a study published May 2 in The Lancet, Dr. Madelyn Gould, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia, evinces an important relationship between the type of news coverage a suicide receives, and the number of copycats it inspires. Gould’s main draw: “Our findings indicate that the more sensational the coverage of the suicides, and the more details the story provides, then the more likely there are to be more suicides.” At Poynter, Kelly McBride emphasizes the study’s bearing on “noble, angelic” portrayals of suicide, portrayals that have palpable repercussions in a community.
[,,,]
Will editors start whitewashing their writers’ suicide reporting in light of these new findings (or, if you prefer, this affirmation of old findings)? Probably not. Most will keep doing what they do, operating within their respective traditions of ethics and taste. That it sells will continue to ensure coverage of anything sensational, but remember that reporters often don’t know that much about the departed. Facebook, meanwhile, has access to far more details about these people than journalists do. While the company sometimes seems confused about its own privacy policies, the Oklahoma incident is especially glaring, and it remains to be seen whether Wolfe’s family will bring legal action.
New Research on Facebook, Fellowship, and Suicide Clusters - Pacific Standard: The Science of Society
No comments:
Post a Comment