Making sure the balance is right in the reporting of suicides
|
Version 0 of 1. One of the areas of journalism that has changed a great deal in the last 15 years or so is the reporting of suicide. Before then I remember that journalists were expected to report every detail read out in the coroner’s court, without any thought as to whether their stories might encourage other suicides. Before charities, notably the Samaritans, encouraged restraint and a greater sense of responsibility, one newspaper even ran a graphic demonstrating the means of a particular suicide. That would be unthinkable now, but there are still aspects of reporting such deaths that cause readers concern. One reader criticised the Guardian’s coverage of the death of 92-year-old Olive Cooke, one of Britain’s oldest and longest-serving poppy sellers, whose body was found in the Avon gorge in Bristol. In the first few days after her death there was intense speculation by family and friends that she had been feeling harassed by the charities calling her seeking donations, which the Guardian – along with other newspapers – reported on 14 May. The reader felt we had gone too far: “I have been disappointed by your coverage of the Olive Cooke death. I was under the impression that the Guardian generally subscribed to the advice given by mental health charities not to speculate or link a potential suicide to any particular cause before an inquest could bring out the true facts. In this case there seems to have been an unseemly rush to attribute the death to charity calling based on speculation by a few family members and before a history of mental illness was uncovered or the contents of notes left by the deceased were revealed. “This sort of thing matters; suicide (if it was suicide) is seldom a simple matter of A causing B, and I see no reason why the paper should need to jump the gun in this way, let alone run, as it seems to want to run, some sort of campaign based on speculation about what is undoubtedly a tragedy. “No less than three articles linking the death to the cold-calling before the inquest is even in a position to start making findings about the cause of death is completely inappropriate. As someone with severe mental health problems who has been fortunate enough to survive suicide attempts I would be horrified at the idea that a national paper would be speculating so enthusiastically and with so little evidence about aspects of my life were I to die under those circumstances.” In fact it emerged at the opening of the inquest, reported by the Guardian on 20 May, that Olive Cooke had “long-term issues with periodic depression and low mood”. The Guardian’s guidance for the reporting of suicides, contained in its editorial code, is: “Journalists are asked to exercise particular care in reporting suicide or issues involving suicide, bearing in mind the risk of encouraging others. This should be borne in mind both in presentation, including the use of pictures, and in describing the method of suicide. Any substances should be referred to in general rather than specific terms if possible. When appropriate a helpline number should be given (eg Samaritans 08457 90 90 90). The feelings of relatives should also be carefully considered. See PCC code, section 5 (ii).” I don’t think the reporting in this case has breached the code. The journalist reported that there were other challenging issues in Olive Cooke’s life, including physical and mental illness. He did not say she had killed herself or give details of how she died. The reader is right that the Samaritans advise the media against speculation before an inquest, but that is not explicit in the Guardian’s guidelines. It is a dilemma for the journalist because Mrs Cooke’s family and friends felt it was right to talk of the pressure they believed she felt under at the time of her death. Not long after that, charities also spoke publicly about their organisation’s relationship with the dead woman and the Institute of Fundraising’s standards committee said it would review the case. A public debate about the nature of charity fundraising had begun before the inquest. Therefore I think there is a public interest in reporting that fact while not prejudging the inquest. |