6 ms·

Enforced by whom? What is the punishment if you break it? This is just not realistic suggestion.

by pc86 4y ago

krisoft 4y ago
There are norms the media choose to follow on their own accord. Think for example how suicides are generally covered. Reputable organisations don't publish the details of the precise method, and they include a link/phone number to a help line for those who struggle themselves. > What is the punishment if you break it? The same as with most norms: Professional embarrassment, and loss of reputation among your peers.
BobbyJo 4y ago
There are already plenty of laws blocking certain kind of information from news. Minors that are crime victims for instance. It's so realistic that it's already a real thing.
renata 4y ago
Self-enforced, the same way the media no longer glorifies teen suicide because of the risk of suicide contagion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide#Journalism_codes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide#Journalism_cod....
tablespoon 4y ago
> Enforced by whom? What is the punishment if you break it? The government. We need a comprehensive set of media safety laws that prevent publication of these dangerous reports so they won't fall into the wrong hands.
- richiebful1 4y ago
  In the United States, I highly doubt this would hold up in court. Forcing media to not publish about mass casualty events is antithetical to the First Amendment protection of free speech and press
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    > Forcing media to not publish about mass casualty events is antithetical to the First Amendment protection of free speech and press So? Shouldn't all options be on the table to solve this problem?
    - NateEag 4y ago
      Almost the fundamental proposition of the USA's governmental system is that some options should never be on the table.
    - pc86 4y ago
      No, of course not. If you want to argue for constitutional amendments, fine. Just ignoring it is not on the table.
      - tablespoon 4y ago
        > If you want to argue for constitutional amendments, fine. Just ignoring it is not on the table. Of course it is on the table. Just pass a media safety law, and if the Supreme Court dares to get in the way, pack it with supporters of the law. Or just ignore the court, too. Didn't it basically grant itself the power to veto laws?
        pc86 4y ago
        Ah yes, "just ignore the court" one of the hallmarks of a democracy.
        tablespoon 4y ago
        > Ah yes, "just ignore the court" one of the hallmarks of a democracy. The Supreme Court is probably the least democratic part of American government.
    - s1artibartfast 4y ago
      All options are worthy of being considered and weighed for efficacy. That said, in the end, some may not be worth it.
- CSSer 4y ago
  Am I the only one sensing sarcasm in this?
  - pc86 4y ago
    Based on the comments below it's almost certainly a low effort troll.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      No. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mass-shootings-are-contagious/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mass-shootings-ar...: > The investigators applied a mathematical model and found that shootings that resulted in at least four deaths launched a period of contagion, marked by a heightened likelihood of more bloodshed, lasting an average of 13 days.... > Previous studies have shown that suicide can be similarly contagious. In one recent example, researchers found a correlation between celebrity suicides, like that of Robin Williams, and an increase in suicidal thoughts in an online Reddit suicide watch group for people battling depression. > “People are susceptible to information about these events, but the mechanism is less clear,” says Andres Gomez-Lievano, a co-author of the mass-shooting study, published in July in PLOS ONE. Where and when the news reports were published could have an effect on incidence, says Dan Romer, director of the Adolescent Communication Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, who was not involved with the study. It is important to note, he says, that “suicides will trigger others, so it makes sense that people who want to commit suicide while killing others could be influenced in the same way.” Unless you get the causes and triggers under control, the attacks will just happen with whatever tools are available (e.g. guns, bladed weapons, bombs, or fire).
bko 4y ago
Someone responsible for a news organization can choose to set the policy. Maybe everyone can stop retweeting this stuff and engaging in a flame war online. Or stop consuming articles and videos about this incident. Not every problem can be solved by the state.

Enforced by whom? What is the punishment if you break it? This is just not realistic suggestion.

by pc86 4y ago

Enforced by whom? What is the punishment if you break it? This is just not realistic suggestion.

There are norms the media choose to follow on their own accord. Think for example how suicides are generally covered. Reputable organisations don't publish the details of the precise method, and they include a link/phone number to a help line for those who struggle themselves. > What is the punishment if you break it? The same as with most norms: Professional embarrassment, and loss of reputation among your peers.

BobbyJo 4y ago

There are already plenty of laws blocking certain kind of information from news. Minors that are crime victims for instance. It's so realistic that it's already a real thing.

renata 4y ago

Self-enforced, the same way the media no longer glorifies teen suicide because of the risk of suicide contagion: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide#Journalism_codes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copycat_suicide#Journalism_cod....

tablespoon 4y ago

> Enforced by whom? What is the punishment if you break it? The government. We need a comprehensive set of media safety laws that prevent publication of these dangerous reports so they won't fall into the wrong hands.

richiebful1 4y ago
In the United States, I highly doubt this would hold up in court. Forcing media to not publish about mass casualty events is antithetical to the First Amendment protection of free speech and press
- tablespoon 4y ago
  > Forcing media to not publish about mass casualty events is antithetical to the First Amendment protection of free speech and press So? Shouldn't all options be on the table to solve this problem?
  - NateEag 4y ago
    Almost the fundamental proposition of the USA's governmental system is that some options should never be on the table.
  - pc86 4y ago
    No, of course not. If you want to argue for constitutional amendments, fine. Just ignoring it is not on the table.
    - tablespoon 4y ago
      > If you want to argue for constitutional amendments, fine. Just ignoring it is not on the table. Of course it is on the table. Just pass a media safety law, and if the Supreme Court dares to get in the way, pack it with supporters of the law. Or just ignore the court, too. Didn't it basically grant itself the power to veto laws?
      - pc86 4y ago
        Ah yes, "just ignore the court" one of the hallmarks of a democracy.
        tablespoon 4y ago
        > Ah yes, "just ignore the court" one of the hallmarks of a democracy. The Supreme Court is probably the least democratic part of American government.
  - s1artibartfast 4y ago
    All options are worthy of being considered and weighed for efficacy. That said, in the end, some may not be worth it.
CSSer 4y ago
Am I the only one sensing sarcasm in this?
- pc86 4y ago
  Based on the comments below it's almost certainly a low effort troll.
  - tablespoon 4y ago
    No. https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mass-shootings-are-contagious/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/mass-shootings-ar...: > The investigators applied a mathematical model and found that shootings that resulted in at least four deaths launched a period of contagion, marked by a heightened likelihood of more bloodshed, lasting an average of 13 days.... > Previous studies have shown that suicide can be similarly contagious. In one recent example, researchers found a correlation between celebrity suicides, like that of Robin Williams, and an increase in suicidal thoughts in an online Reddit suicide watch group for people battling depression. > “People are susceptible to information about these events, but the mechanism is less clear,” says Andres Gomez-Lievano, a co-author of the mass-shooting study, published in July in PLOS ONE. Where and when the news reports were published could have an effect on incidence, says Dan Romer, director of the Adolescent Communication Institute at the University of Pennsylvania, who was not involved with the study. It is important to note, he says, that “suicides will trigger others, so it makes sense that people who want to commit suicide while killing others could be influenced in the same way.” Unless you get the causes and triggers under control, the attacks will just happen with whatever tools are available (e.g. guns, bladed weapons, bombs, or fire).

bko 4y ago

Someone responsible for a news organization can choose to set the policy. Maybe everyone can stop retweeting this stuff and engaging in a flame war online. Or stop consuming articles and videos about this incident. Not every problem can be solved by the state.