What This Means in Plain English
Suicide reporting is one of the most safety-critical areas of journalism ethics. The evidence is clear: irresponsible reporting can contribute to additional deaths through the contagion effect. Responsible reporting can save lives by showing that crises can be survived and by directing readers to help.
IPSO Editors’ Code Clause 5 states that “when reporting suicide, to prevent simulative acts care should be taken to avoid excessive detail of the method used.” This is one of the few mandatory provisions in the Code that applies regardless of public interest. The Samaritans Media Guidelines, which are voluntary but widely adopted, go further: they set out specific language to use and avoid, how to handle images, and what helpline information to include.
The guidelines are not about suppressing information — they are about recognising that certain types of detail (method, location, romanticising language) carry documented harm risk while serving no journalistic purpose that could not be served without them.
When This Matters Most
Celebrity suicide
High-profile deaths generate intense coverage. The contagion risk is highest with celebrity cases — the Marilyn Monroe effect is well-documented in the research literature.
Youth and cluster suicides
School or community cluster suicides require particular care. IPSO has specific guidance on reporting clusters, and local authorities may request a media blackout during a crisis.
Inquest reporting
Reporting a coroner's conclusion of suicide is protected by legal privilege but must still follow Samaritans method-detail guidance.
Suicide of young people
Additional safeguarding considerations apply. Young people's deaths attract Papyrus HOPELINE as the primary resource.
Broadcast and online video
Visual and audio content carries higher contagion risk than print. Ofcom Broadcasting Code has specific provisions for television and radio.
Social media and live reporting
Live events involving suicidal crisis must not be covered in real-time without consultation with editors and consideration of the safety impact.
Red Flags
- !Including specific method details — particularly novel or emerging methods which carry highest contagion risk
- !Naming or describing the location in detail when it has become a known "hotspot"
- !Headlines that romanticise, glamorise, or present suicide as a solution to problems
- !Using the phrase "committed suicide" (implies criminality; prefer "died by suicide" or "took their own life")
- !Publishing a suicide note or extensive extracts from one
- !Images that show the method, location, or depict the person in distress
- !Covering a suicide in a way that implies celebrity or glamour ("they chose to die on their own terms")
- !Reporting a suspected suicide as confirmed before a coroner's inquest is concluded
- !Covering a cluster suicide in a way that names the "number in the cluster" — this can itself become a contagion factor
- !No helpline information included in or appended to the report
Pre-Publication Checklist
- Have I avoided all specific method detail, including novel methods?
- Have I avoided naming or describing the specific location if it is a known hotspot?
- Have I used "died by suicide" or "took their own life" rather than "committed suicide"?
- Have I omitted any suicide note or extracts from one?
- Does the coverage avoid romanticising or glamorising the death?
- Have I included at minimum Samaritans 116 123 and Shout 85258 helpline information?
- For youth-focused coverage: have I included Papyrus HOPELINE (0800 068 4141)?
- Have I checked whether the inquest has concluded before describing the death as a confirmed suicide?
- For broadcast: have I applied Ofcom Broadcasting Code provisions on suicide depiction?
- Have I consulted the current Samaritans Media Guidelines (updated 2023)?
Is there a public interest justification for more detailed coverage?
If you’re considering more detailed coverage of a suicide-related story — such as an investigation into systemic failures in mental health care — use our Public Interest Test Builder to document your editorial justification in the format IPSO expects.
Open Public Interest Test Builder →Common Mistakes
- ›Assuming that because the inquest is a public proceeding, any detail from it can be reported without restriction — the method-detail restriction applies regardless.
- ›Treating the Samaritans guidelines as optional because they are voluntary — IPSO decisions have referenced non-compliance with them as evidence of irresponsible reporting.
- ›Including helpline information only at the very end of a long digital article — best practice is to include it prominently near the top.
- ›Reporting a suspected suicide as confirmed before the coroner's conclusion — this is legally as well as ethically problematic.
- ›Covering every detail of a celebrity suicide because "readers want to know" — high profile cases carry the highest contagion risk.
- ›Assuming print-specific guidance does not apply to online publication — all IPSO Clause 5 provisions apply online.
- ›Not updating old articles that contain detailed method information following a policy change — archive content carries the same risk as new content.