The past two days I have been at the annual Bliss Communications editors conference in Stevens Point. It's a chance for editors from the company's newspapers to talk shop, learn and commiserate.
One of the many interesting discussions that we had during the conference was about how papers handle bad news in their small communities. There were a handful of examples discussed, but one in particular dealt with how to report, or not report, deaths by suicide.
Four daily newspapers, including the Times, and one weekly newspaper were represented at the conference. In general, all five newspapers have policies of not publishing information about suicides. It is a policy most newspapers across the nation have. The common thought is that reporting a suicide, and identifying the deceased, places a stigma on the remaining family.
All of our papers have exceptions to the general rule, of course. A suicide in a public place, or by a public figure, would be reported because of the news value in doing so. Each newspaper editor agreed that some decisions must be made on a case-by-case basis, not necessarily adhering to any specific rule. A common thread is that all newspapers and their staffs agonize over each of these decisions. They are not made lightly.
Only one newspaper, the Janesville Gazette, had a written policy. The Times and the other papers have policies that, while understood by staff, are not in writing. That is something we'll be changing.
One of the group's editors attended a seminar recently in which a suicide prevention group urged newspapers to do more reporting of suicides - not necessarily to name names in stories but to do more to make readers aware of the problem.
Another newspaper outside of our chain has a policy of publishing news of all suicides, but not to call them "suicides." Using the phrase "self-inflicted gunshot wound" would be one way the paper tells readers what happened without using the word "suicide." That policy was given to our editors as a handout, but certainly not as a suggestion.
There is a school of thought out there that publishing suicides glorifies the act. Obviously, it is an argument against printing news of suicides in the newspaper.
I have no plans to change our policy about printing news of suicides, other than to get them in writing, but I'd welcome your thoughts on the subject. Feel free to comment, and I'll try to respond when appropriate.
One of the many interesting discussions that we had during the conference was about how papers handle bad news in their small communities. There were a handful of examples discussed, but one in particular dealt with how to report, or not report, deaths by suicide.
Four daily newspapers, including the Times, and one weekly newspaper were represented at the conference. In general, all five newspapers have policies of not publishing information about suicides. It is a policy most newspapers across the nation have. The common thought is that reporting a suicide, and identifying the deceased, places a stigma on the remaining family.
All of our papers have exceptions to the general rule, of course. A suicide in a public place, or by a public figure, would be reported because of the news value in doing so. Each newspaper editor agreed that some decisions must be made on a case-by-case basis, not necessarily adhering to any specific rule. A common thread is that all newspapers and their staffs agonize over each of these decisions. They are not made lightly.
Only one newspaper, the Janesville Gazette, had a written policy. The Times and the other papers have policies that, while understood by staff, are not in writing. That is something we'll be changing.
One of the group's editors attended a seminar recently in which a suicide prevention group urged newspapers to do more reporting of suicides - not necessarily to name names in stories but to do more to make readers aware of the problem.
Another newspaper outside of our chain has a policy of publishing news of all suicides, but not to call them "suicides." Using the phrase "self-inflicted gunshot wound" would be one way the paper tells readers what happened without using the word "suicide." That policy was given to our editors as a handout, but certainly not as a suggestion.
There is a school of thought out there that publishing suicides glorifies the act. Obviously, it is an argument against printing news of suicides in the newspaper.
I have no plans to change our policy about printing news of suicides, other than to get them in writing, but I'd welcome your thoughts on the subject. Feel free to comment, and I'll try to respond when appropriate.
