Slashdot Mirror
Internet Sites Biased Towards Supporting Suicide
Believe It Or Not, I Care About You writes "According to a new study in the British Medical Journal which examined the search results for various suicide-related search terms, the most common results supported or encouraged suicide. Wikipedia was one of the most prevalent sources of information, particularly on suicide methods, although the Wikimedia Foundation itself does not encourage suicide. Other studies have shown that media coverage has an effect on suicide particularly with respect to influencing the method chosen. Interestingly, this study notes that suicide rates actually decreased with increased Web usage in England, perhaps because support is readily available to anyone who wants it."
KILL YOURSELF FAGGOT!!!
The desire for suicide stems from desperation, from having no way out, from not being heard or understood by anyone. The "support" of suicide provides those with suicidal tendencies with a way out, and gives them the feeling that they are heard and understood. This then decreases the actual risk of suicide.
on Comcast. I wonder why?? I guess dealing with Comcast is worse than death.
...although the Wikimedia Foundation itself does not encourage suicide.Glad to see they cleared that up.
The Mothership
Suicide is a problem that will resolve itself.
Unless you're a completely fuckup.
...although the Wikimedia Foundation itself does not encourage suicideNot even when it comes to their founder?
The Mothership
Well, gee, if you search for only websites that offer "suicide methods" (as most of the researcher's search terms were constructed), it's not surprising you're going to find exactly that -- a lot of websites that are biased toward providing suicide methods.
The researchers stacked the deck at the onset by carefully defining their search terms to focus exclusively on "suicide methods" (not reasonable other search terms, like suicide crisis, support, help, etc.) The one non-biased search term ("suicide") shows zero pro-suicide websites in the top 10 search results on the 4 search engines the researchers used.
Read my full response at the BMJ:
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters?lookup=by_date&days=1#193559
--
Psych Central
psychcentral.com
...but what's the point?
Demented But Determined.
Ok emos everywhere, this is how you do it.
Stand at the top of a tall structure and make sure that there is something relatively soft below.
Tie cheese wire around your neck - tight enough that it won't slip off under tension but loose enough not to choke you.
Tie the other end to something solid on top of the structure. Make sure that there is a good six or seven feet of slack.
Now stand at the edge and glue your hands to the side of your head. Wait until your hands are glued solidly to your head.
Now jump off the structure. It'll only hurt for a second, when the cheese wire runs out of slack and slices through your neck. The overhang should stop you from bashing your now-severed head against the wall of the structure when the cutting motion jerks your body backwards.
This has the excellent effect of causing whoever finds your body to think that you have pulled your head off.
One of my favorite quotes (paraphrased): "Do you know what type of suicide rate we'd have if every idiot killed themselves? Yes, an acceptable one."
Also, I believe the punishment for attempted suicide should be death. If you can't do it right, we'll do it for you.
------
"And may your days be long upon the earth."
If you read the study itself, it's weighted almost entirely for people actually searching for ways to do the deed. Of course it mostly returns results instructing people how to do it, that's what they told the search engines to give them! This isn't science, this is stupidity!
Well, look at is this way: You have suicide, and then the opposite of suicide, which is "going on living."
Most of us are familiar with the idea of 'going on living' and have no difficulty in breathing, eating, etc. All it takes to 'go on living' is to sit there and do nothing. It is not an interesting topic nor does it raise very many interesting discussions except for 1000-level philosophy courses.
Suicide, on the other hand, is an action with immediate and also long-lasting effects on the person (of course) and society. Suicide is something that has affected me very personally several times; I can tell you that even 5-10 years after the fact, the families and friends are still having a hard time coping. So it is clear that suicide is something that warrants a fair bit of attention.
As for the question of bias (pro- or anti-suicide) based on these web searches- I think about it this way.
There are many websites out there that will tell you how to build a bomb, or repair a boat hull, or repoint masonry. A huge portion of the internet is devoted to graphic images of sex that most people find repulsive (furries...). I don't think that it's been shown that simply viewing and thinking about a subject makes a person more likely to partake in that subject, unless that person never had any exposure at all previously. Suicide is not a new band or a potato gun or a case mod. People know what suicide is from a very young age. Anyone who has every thought at all has thought about suicide before, even if only intellectually and not as a solution. It is a myth that bringing up suicide and discussing it will push depressed but stable people over the edge.
Depressed people and the people affected by depressed loved ones can find a tremendous amount of information and support on the internet. I'm not sure what the point of this slashdot article was, but I believe that any and all information about suicide ought to be public.
-b
No offense, but I've stopped responding to AC's.
From the summary:
the most common results supported or encouraged suicide.From the article, the search terms:
suicide, suicide methods, suicide sure methods, most effective methods of suicide, methods of suicide, ways to commit suicide, how to commit suicide, how to kill yourself, easy suicide methods, best suicide methods, pain-free suicide, and quick suicide.To me that seems to indicate that search engines are working, not that there is more pro-suicide info online than anti-suicide. For some strange reason I doubt most anti-suicide sites will include useful information on "best suicide methods" or "pain-free suicide." The same applies to the majority of the terms used. In fact, 11 of those 12 terms are specific to people looking for ways to commit suicide. Maybe the study should have looked for terms/phrases geared towards whether or not people should commit suicide. I don't know about you but if I am looking to research painless ways to commit suicide (for whatever reason) and I search for "pain-free suicide" and the majority of the results returned are not about that topic but about trying to discourage people from doing it, well the search engine was ineffective and I would be annoyed. I don't have any problem at all with search engines not being easily hijacked by people with a specific agenda of providing me some information I don't want (be it advertising or anti-suicide counseling) instead of the information I clearly do want based upon my search criteria. Maybe if suicide prevention groups don't like this they can do the same as commercial companies and buy some ad space.
That they have to google how to kill themselves?
It makes perfect sense!
love is just extroverted narcissism
I don't know if I can go on after reading this.
Just a quick comment regarding the intertubes usefulness for support. My mum died after her 12 year battle with cancer at the end of last year; I was stuyding externally so I could help take care of her as she was getting weaker.
In all honesty I don't know where I would have been then or now without the Internet. Within a few hours of realising the unthinkable happened I had people literally from as far away as Alaska and South Africa (I live in Singapore) sending their condolences and thoughts, it really was something else.Also I think people tend to think of support in the fairly narrow sense, don't underestimate the pleasent distraction and coping help you can get from tinkering with source code from your favourite FLOSS app or OS, say for example FreeBSD. Really got me through some tough times.
Cheers, ~ Ruben
The researchers performed a bunch of searches on ways to kill yourself, and that's what they found. Looks like a great demonstration of how search engines work. They should stop acting shocked that the search engine actually returned results relevant to their searches, and instead be happy they didn't get a bunch of "free-celebrity-nude-ringtones-game-cheats-mp3.com" bullshit instead.
They should have asked that question of a bunch of recent suicide attempters first.
Have you been touched by his noodly appendage?
A lot of people who seriously consider or attempt suicide are simply going a particularly bad time, and after surviving their brush with death go on to lead productive lives. Saying "just take yourself out of the gene pool" to these people isn't only callous, it's dumb.
That being said, I do believe that people who genuinely want to die and who have carefully worked out their reasons for this desire, after considering and rejecting the alternatives, should be allowed to do so. In particular, if I were dying of something that would inevitably kill me slowly and painfully (or worse, destroy the person I am long before my body dies, like Alzheimer's) then I would very much hope that I could find a sympathetic doctor to hook me up with some, ah, special medications.
The correlation between ignorance of statistics and using "correlation is not causation" as an argument is close to 1.
The audacity of the Slashdot editors to post such inane drivel! Everyone knows that anything that is two days old is obviously completely irrelevant and not worth discussing! Fucking heathens should be punished for their intolerable behavior!
Most of the sites referenced by the study seem not necessarily to be "pro" but simply making the information available. While this may seem heinous and "pro" to anyone adamantly against suicide, it is a fallacy of logic to presume those sites are "pro suicide." A parallel of this fallacy would be to believe any site that discusses Hitler would be "pro Nazi". To make information available can very much be a neutral or impartial act, and needs to be differentiated from sites (of which there certainly were also some cited by the study) that said you "should" kill yourself. Those I think we should condemn, but for us to condemn simple availability of information is a very dangerous censorship line to cross.
"We can categorically state we have not released man-eating badgers into the area." - UK military spokesman, July 2007
Remember, Slashdot is powered by your submissions!
Sometimes multiple times.
So, they found out that:
- search engines work well when searching for suicide methods.
- wikipedia is one of the best sources of information on the internet.
brilliant
Okay, it got me curious. If you go to google and enter pain-free suicide into the product search it provides five sponsired links and they are:
Just because websites provide information explaining how people kill themselves, and what the details of the nasty process are like, doesn't mean those sites "support" suicide, in the sense of recommending, endorsing or encouraging it. In fact, the facts about suicide reveal that it's hard to kill oneself, that it's complicated, likely to fail, painful, embarassing, and just plain hard. Lots of people talking about killing themselves or just thinking about it will not go through with it if they know what will really probably happen, if they get a good look at the process with enough time to think about it, rather than just wash down a bottle of downers with a quart of liquor (which often doesn't work, as some of these websites explain).
Maybe the increased availability of graphic facts about what the person is thinking of doing is part of the reason that fewer people are doing it. Maybe the prevention services aren't entirely effective, but don't want to compete with simple websites that are often more approachable and carry less stigma from private viewing than asking another person for help, or admitting that one is seriously considering that desperate measure.
The fear-driven conclusion that sharing information about a practice is equivalent to encouraging it, when that info includes the discouraging facts about it, has got to go away. It's an old coping mechanism for "dangerous" information that relies on centralized authorities, and the control of the info supply, rather than growing the ability of people to think about whatever info we come across, and protect ourselves from what we filter as "bad". This is the Info Age. We've got a lot of growing up to do. Because the info flood is only going to gush more strongly, and only learning to think for ourselves can protect us.
--
make install -not war
Yeah, but when they do go out, they go out with one hell of a bang!
I have schizoaffective disorder. It's just like being manic depressive and schizophrenic at the same time. One of the symptoms is severe depression: I have attempted suicide twice. There were several years where I was almost continuously suicidal. It was quite a grim existence.
I also know now that depression is actually a delusional state; feeling that life is not worth living is no more real than regarding oneself as the Emperor of France. It can almost always be effectively treated, and often cured completely.
I have found many times that the antidepressants I take for it (imipramine these days) have the effect of changing the behaviour of other people, making them friendlier towards me. Strangers are more likely to strike up conversations with me when I'm medicated.
I'm not kidding! I'm absolutely serious.
Request your free CD of my piano music.
It's like a .45, but it scores badly in IQ tests.
What if Tetris was invented by Nazis?
How to kill yourself like a man
http://outcampaign.org/
Yes, but don't worry, a person wanting to commit suicide can also find plenty of good advice on the web that will give him or her some perspective and allow him/her to make a wise desicion.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Darwin is also satisfied. :)
Razors pain you;
Rivers are damp;
Acids stain you;
And drugs cause cramp.
Guns arent lawful;
Nooses give;
Gas smells awful;
You might as well live.
(Dorothy Parker)
Maybe the moron that modded this as "Flamebait" should consider the *horrible* emotional suffering that I, and other suicide survivors, experience. This has been the most painful experience in my life -- the suffering is beyond description. Ever heard of sympathy? You'll be wanting it if ever one of your loved ones dies before their time.
jdb2
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You got the wrong story. This is the one you're looking for
(Disclaimer: It's a joke, OK? Don't take it so seriously)
That would be about the only reason I could think to move to Oregon, but it's nice to know that somebody was thinking the problem through.
Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
I've tried posting on kuro5hin too, but there's this guy there that tries pimping his music so frequently that I don't know how I can go on living.
10 PRINT CHR$(205.5+RND(1)); : GOTO 10
While I agree with the parent in almost every way, you should note that recommending advil as a way to die is most assuredly NOT telling them "how to do it less painfully". That's a rather painful way to go. (Tylenol is worse.)
Personally, I'm glad people told me how painful, for example, a tylenol overdose would be, when I was younger and suicidal. It was probably the most persuasive thing anyone could have told me at the time to keep me from doing it. If my friend hadn't told me about that, I'd have gone through with it, and either have my stomach pumped or have died in agony, neither of which was what I wanted as an annoying, angsty, suicidal teen.
Suicide, in general, is pretty messy and painful, hard, and most methods tend not to kill but only make life much, much worse when you survive. I think telling people this is a good thing, because most suicidal people want to *end* pain, not cause themselves more of it, so the facts can help dissuade people. On top of that, simply talking about suicide (rather than getting angry and trying to censor discussion of it) can allow suicidal people to vent and maybe take off their tunnel-vision goggles, and makes it more possible for them to seek help.
The Wikipedia article on Suicide seems to be written in that completely dispassionate, apparently unbiased way that all the better Wikipedia articles are. I suppose they neither encourage nor discourage suicide.
It thus reflects the rest of the Internet. If you want to join a cult, there's plenty of information out there -- the Church of Scientology has certainly staked out its own turf. If you want to have all kinds of crazy, kinky sex, there's information on where to buy Gor books, on how to safely suffocate someone almost until they pass out, or how, exactly, to apply a whip or crop for maximum pain but minimum actual injury...
And if you want to commit suicide, you can find out where to get a gun, and how to load it. Or how to hang yourself -- how to set up the drop to be quick and hard enough to snap your neck before you feel any pain.
And if you want to get out of depression, it'll show you all kinds of prescription pills, psychiatrists, meditation, or simply support groups to help you through it.
In other words, the Internet itself is neutral -- due to the sheer amount of diversity out there, what the Internet is to you is exactly what you choose for it to be.
Is that a good thing? Would it be better if Wikipedia actively discouraged suicide?
Oh, one more thing: What I've found to be effective is simply talking to the person. It doesn't matter what you say, or even too much how you say it. It matters more that you are there -- human contact helps.
A real example: Someone told me of her plans to commit suicide. I was sick of trying to help her with her almost daily threatening to do so. So instead, I asked her how she was planning to do it. And I criticized her for her technique, and brainstormed a bit with her on more effective ways of killing herself -- quickly, and without mistakes, so she wouldn't wake up in the hospital.
And after a few minutes of this, she broke out laughing at the absurdity of the situation.
Remember, kids -- anyone who really wants to end their life can do it, quickly, easily, painlessly -- or painfully, if they like. The fact that they are still alive and still talking to you means they aren't going to go through with it.
I can only wonder if the Wikipedia article could have anything like that effect... Or if it's just the opposite, if it's too impersonal.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
The +5 insightful is due to the link to TED I suppose.
Putting yourself in the center of the universe and not understanding why other people may have different feelings is not insightful in my opinion.
There's an interesting experiment described on this page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learned_helplessness in which dogs are put in an unpleasant situation that they can not escape from. Only 30% of the dogs where not effected in such a way that they thought the situation could not be escaped in the future. Translated to humans I think this means that the majority of people would become depressed if they were in a hopeless situation without a job, family or friends for extended periods of time. Not just an unfortunate few. I think most people are just lucky that they are fixed in this social framwork of work an relationships that is so important for their wellbeing. They would fall apart when it drops away. Then only the other part of 30% may actually see new opportunities.