Renate Thienel, Marc Bryant, Gavin Hazel, Jaelea Skehan and Ross Tynan
Media reporting and portrayals of mental illness and suicide can play an important role in shaping and reinforcing community attitudes and perceptions. Depending on the content, a…
Abstract
Purpose
Media reporting and portrayals of mental illness and suicide can play an important role in shaping and reinforcing community attitudes and perceptions. Depending on the content, a report about suicide can have either a negative (Werther-) or a positive (Papageno-) effect. Evidence-informed recommendations for the reporting of suicide in Australia are provided under the Mindframe initiative. The purpose of this paper is to assess the application of these recommendations in broadcasts associated with one of the largest national campaigns to promote suicide prevention, the R U OK? Day, a yearly campaign of the Australian suicide prevention charity R U OK?
Design/methodology/approach
The sample consisted of 112 (32 TV, 80 radio) Australian broadcasts discussing the R U OK? Day suicide prevention campaign during the month preceding the 2015 campaign and on the national R U OK? Day itself. Broadcasts were coded for medium (TV or radio), content (suicide focus, mental illness focus or both) and consistency with Mindframe recommendations.
Findings
Over 97 per cent of broadcasts used language consistent with Mindframe recommendations. None of the broadcasts used images that negatively portrayed mental illness or suicide; there were no instances of using mental illness to describe a person’s behaviour; and no sensationalizing or glamorising terminology was used in the broadcasts. However, less than 40 per cent of the broadcasts included help-seeking information (e.g. helplines) and some of the broadcasts used negative or outdated terminology (e.g. “commit” suicide; “suffering” from mental illness).
Originality/value
The present study is the first to examine consistency with reporting recommendations around a national suicide prevention campaign (R U OK? Day). The results can steer improvements in current reporting and inform strategies to optimise future reporting.
Details
Keywords
Gerhard Hammerschmid, Renate E. Meyer and Christoph Demmke
In this chapter, we present results from an EU-wide survey on public administration reform. Our analysis shows that the 27 public administrations covered still organize their HR…
Abstract
In this chapter, we present results from an EU-wide survey on public administration reform. Our analysis shows that the 27 public administrations covered still organize their HR services very differently. Divergent structures, traditions, and paths taken do not seem to give rise to an overall shared new model of a European Administrative Space, yet. Different national traditions have a considerable impact on the modernization paths and the organization of HR decision-making structures and account for similarities between more related public administrations. The clusters based on the administrative traditions and on the HR systems proved to be helpful in outlining different patterns, but also revealed several directions for refinement.