This stands under my general concern that tech companies are neither cognizant of nor culpable for the impact they have on society.
I haven't looked to see whether our numbers reflect any trend from that time period two years ago, but I'd be curious to see at some point.
I have to imagine this is not a new phenomenon. How many young adults have listened to music and been persuaded (or influenced) to commit suicide?
Maybe there is no causation or relation, maybe there is, what is the issue with finding out?
I'm sure at one point studying many of the attributes of what makes a serial killer were considered with the same contempt.
Which is to say, not at all? Nobody takes the mental health of students seriously. If we did, our schools would look quite different.
That being said, I really don't think we should dumb down or "tame" our art for the sake of safety. It's important to allow artists (the show creators in this case) the ability to tell any story that speaks to them, especially when that deals with sensitive issues like suicide.
The warning before the show seems like a good idea though.
Yes.[0] Newspapers try not to cover suicide whenever possible and when they do they always also write about emergency suicide prevention hotlines. At least in switzerland.
[0] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-suicide-media/suic...
https://www.nuj.org.uk/news/mental-health-and-suicide-report...
I use this one because they're journalists and so understand the balance of freedom of speech with not causing harm.
They're quite old.
The BBC also has guidance here: https://www.bbc.co.uk/editorialguidelines/guidelines/harm-an...
They've unhelpfully put them in a section titled "harm and offence", so if I ever contact the BBC about poor reporting I have to say that I'm not bothered about offence, I'm letting them know about something that may cause harm.
Parents shouldn't let their children watch shows they don't approve of. For everyone else, just don't watch if it bothers you. Yes, it's fine to criticize and comment, but creators are under no obligation to listen to the critics and in most cases are better off sticking to their original vision.
Both of these are strictly regulated, right? I don't think you're suggesting that media companies should be similarly regulated, but I don't know why you'd mention them.
>We collectively need to toughen up
Unfortunate phrasing in the context of vulnerable children killing themselves.
I have the message I get from my parents, the message I get from "everyone else" (which is really several messages from various groups), and the message I determine for myself. That latter is heavily influenced by what the other messages say. (See the other current HN article about student drinking being decided by how much they think others are drinking).
To simply say "Choose for yourself and your children, I'll do the same, and we shouldn't talk about it" is a de facto declaration that society as a whole approves of the behavior/activity.
On this particular issue I honestly have no idea where I stand...I know of and believe the impact that (deliberately or inadvertently) "encouraging" suicide has (or even just coverage)...but I also don't like the idea of being against discussing and exploring ideas. The solution is to DISCUSS what to do, not just pretend we're all fully informed individualists.