Troubling content: Guiding discussion of death by suicide on social media

Abstract

Growing concerns about “online harm” and “duty of care” fuel debate about how best to regulate and moderate “troubling content” on social media. This has become a pressing issue in relation to the potential application of media guidelines to online discussion of death by suicide—discussion which is troubling because it is often transgressive and contested. Drawing on an innovative mixed‐method analysis of a large‐scale Twitter dataset, this article explores in depth, for the first time, the complexities of applying existing media guidelines on reporting death by suicide to online contexts. By focusing on five highly publicised deaths, it illustrates the limits of this translation but also the significance of empathy (its presence and absence) in online accounts of these deaths. The multi‐relational and politicised nature of empathy, and the polarised nature of Twitter debate, suggests that we need to step back from calls for the automatic application of guidelines produced in a pre‐digital time to understand more about the sociocultural context of how suicide is discussed on social media. This stepping back matters because social media is now a key part of how lives and deaths are deemed grievable and deserving of our attention.

Social Media Sentiments on Suicides at the New York City Landmark, Vessel: A Twitter Study

“…In social media, novel interventions are needed to steer discussions in positive directions to prevent unintended consequences at suicide hotspots, especially when the volume of Twitter discussions showed an upward trend after each successive suicide case in this study. While some have pointed out the difficulty in establishing detailed legal rules on social media platforms and emphasized their importance in providing a public space for individuals to grieve over the loss of lives and to show empathy [ 30 , 31 ], our human annotation indicates that the number of supportive messages, including those that encourage help-seeking, were minimal across the four cases. Thus, relevant guidelines should be publicized and the public should be educated; #chatsafe is one such intervention that is gaining traction [ 32 , 33 , 34 ].…”

Acceptability and Potential Impact of the #chatsafe Suicide Postvention Response Among Young People Who Have Been Exposed to Suicide: Pilot Study

“…This is of concern, considering that harmful content, such as specific details about suicide, is thought to encourage imitative behavior [ 14 , 34 , 47 ]. These data speak to the amount and type of suicide-related content that young people are exposed to online and add further weight to the growing concerns about the potential impact of social media on youth mental health and suicide risk [ 9 , 16 , 47 ]. Taken together, these data highlight the importance of equipping young people with the skills to keep themselves and their peers safe when actively or passively engaging with suicide-related information on social media.…”

“…Concerns relating to the impact of exposure to suicide have been heightened in the age of social media [ 9 , 16 ]. This is unsurprising, given the amount of time young people typically spend online and the speed at which unregulated and potentially distressing information about suicide can spread [ 17 , 18 ].…”

Social Contagion, from Suicide to Online Challenges to Eating Disorders: Current Research and Harm Mitigation Strategies for Youth Online

“…To build upon the WHO guidelines for safe suicide reporting, some mental and public health professionals have called for similar guidelines for social media posting to mitigate harm spread by social contagion (WHO & IASP 2017;Roth et al 2020). Brownlie et al (2021) suggests focusing more broadly on preventative efforts when formulating guidelines that educate users on the larger implications of the content that they post regarding not only suicide but other sensitive topics as well. Current suggestions call for the creation of informative guidelines surrounding what kind of eating disorder content is harmful, potential alternatives to engaging with pro-ED content, and harm reduction strategies (Sharpe et al 2011).…”

“…There are several complications social media presents that differ from traditional media sources. For example, on social networks there is an immediacy of information spreading, and posts have the ability to go viral almost immediately or become suggested content to those outside of someone's immediate social circle (Brownlie et al 2021). Social media platforms have become one of the primary ways in which content is disseminated and consumed, placing more emphasis and urgency on the need for guidelines or regulations for particularly high-risk behaviors such as self-harm and disordered eating (Sumner, Burke, and Kooti 2020).…”