Restraint is what is needed from the media over the death of Caroline Flack

Editorial: It is a time to reflect on whether news outlets have erred on the side of excess, even given the intense public interest

The coverage of Flack’s death (and of others before her) shows that there is a need for further voluntary restraint in the treatment of suicides (Reuters)

The reporting of the death of Caroline Flack was clearly high profile, and inevitably so. The reporting of the more precise circumstances of her death has suffered from being over-sensationalist and in poor taste, and unnecessarily so.

The way she chose to take her own life has been put into headlines, and the treatment given to the story has generally lacked restraint. It seems likely that it has added to the distress of family and those closest to her, even if the family released a final unpublished Instagram posting, suggesting the turmoil that had enveloped Flack. It makes for sombre reading. Yet, the presentation of her story has grown more tawdry as new details have come to light. Too little regard has been paid to how all of that might affect vulnerable people.

Some might say it is probably no better than might be expected in a free society with a robust, fiercely competitive free press, with the liberty to make its own mistakes. Still, the press is also perfectly capable of controlling itself, and behaving responsibly, as the industry’s codes of practice require. Most journalists in most publications are careful most of the time about truth and fact, and the impact of what they present to the public. Yet the recent coverage of Flack’s death (and of others before her) shows that there is a need for further voluntary restraint in the treatment of suicides, and a tightening of the relevant industry codes of practice accordingly.

The Samaritans is an irreproachable charity which has worked in the field since 1953. Its volunteers know what they are talking about, and deserve to be listened to; this is no mere special interest group, but people dedicated to saving lives. The Samaritans’ media code is admirably detached and clear: “Research consistently demonstrates strong links between certain types of media coverage and increases in suicide rates. This risk significantly increases if details of suicide methods are reported, if the story is placed prominently and if the coverage is extensive or sensationalised – particularly in the case of celebrity deaths.”

The charity asks journalists to be “mindful that celebrity suicides have a higher risk of encouraging imitational suicidal behaviour, particularly if the media coverage is extensive and sensationalist”.

In particular, the Samaritans ask the media to: “Avoid explicit details of the suicide method, eg do not describe how the person died or what material was used (ideally, do not report the method of suicide at all).”

In an advisory industry code of practice, such as that issued by the Society of Editors, some at least of those structures could be usefully incorporated without any undue damage to press freedom.

Flack was a well-known celebrity, and her pending prosecution for an alleged assault was also the subject of a great deal of news reporting and commentary, as well as posts by individuals on social media. Some of it was undoubtedly offensive and distressing to Flack, her partner, her family more widely, her friends and her colleagues – and indeed to some members of the public. Most of it was concerned with details of her private life, and carried a fair amount of innuendo, speculation and worse.

However, there was at least one other issue, which was the circumstances in which the authorities chose to press ahead with her prosecution even when all of those involved opposed the move. Since her death this has of course become an even more acute cause for concern.

There has also been a constructive debate about the media’s response, the nature of celebrity culture and the morality of intrusive “reality” television. All of that could and should have been aired, but none of it required the circumstances of her death to be headline “splashed” in quite such a high-profile manner. It is a matter of degree and judgement, and a moment now for the media to reflect on whether it has erred on the side of excess, even given the intense public interest in Flack’s life and death.

The press should be free to make its errors of judgement; but also confident enough to correct them, and make redress.

If you are experiencing feelings of distress and isolation, or are struggling to cope, The Samaritans offers support; you can speak to someone for free over the phone, in confidence, on 116 123 (UK and ROI), email jo@samaritans.org, or visit the Samaritans website to find details of your nearest branch. For services local to you, the national mental health database – Hub of Hope – allows you to enter your postcode to search for organisations and charities who offer mental health advice and support in your area