A journalist sent this to me with the one word subject line: “Seriously?” There was a link to a story on CNN’s website about people being depressed – even suicidal – after watching the movie, “Avatar.”
As if there hasn’t been enough hype about this movie, now CNN stirs the pot by reporting:
“James Cameron’s completely immersive spectacle “Avatar” may have been a little too real for some fans who say they have experienced depression and suicidal thoughts after seeing the film because they long to enjoy the beauty of the alien world Pandora.”
That kind of flip discussion of depression and suicide shows no appreciation for concerns over media portrayal of suicide and the phenomenon of copycat suicides. If this, indeed, is such a newsworthy phenomenon, shouldn’t the story have mentioned at least one mental health resource for troubled readers or moviegoers?
And all of it was based on posts to an online chat forum.
Well, online chatters responded to the CNN story itself, writing:
“Geez, I thought this was a joke the first time I read it! What annoys me here is abuse of the word “depression.” Depression is a clinical mental illness that has to be ongoing and significant to be actual depression. It isn’t the same as being a little bummed that a silly movie isn’t real.”
“This is far and away the stupidest article I’ve ever read.”
“Wait, this isn’t theonion.com? Serious journalism indeed.”
Comments
Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.
Comments are closed.
Our Comments Policy
But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.
You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.
This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.
We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.
We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.
There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”
The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:
We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.
And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.
The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.
You might also like