Member Feedback

The ISSS Outreach Committee would like your feedback!

The 2018 version of the proposed NSSI Media Guidelines is available below.
If you have feedback, please comment on the document below using the comments section at the bottom of this page.


4 thoughts on “Member Feedback”

  • From Nienke Kool-Goudzwaard:

    Thanks for this great work, it is an important issue!

    I like very much that the recommendations are divided in what not to do and what to do instead, that can be very helpful. I also like the links to websites that offer reliable information. It is important for those websites to be up to date, which is (unfortunately) not always the case. I also like the prioritizing.
    Recommendation 5 is a bit doubtful. For al lot of people who self-injure, this is exactly how they feel: that they cannot cope without and that there is no other solution. So it is important from whose perspective something is mentioned, and to add a hopeful statement or alternative.
    I was wondering whether people with lived-experience were invited to comment this document? they can tell exactly what triggers and what is helpful in media

    Suggestion: it would be nice to have these media guidelines in different languages, with links in their own language and culture!

  • I have read these guidelines with pleasure and found them very interesting. I think that these directives would help us to spread a good information about NSSI in population. Here are some thoughts that aroused reading.

    About point 1. In the press and on the internet, I would use symbolic images that symbolically link up with the idea to be transmitted, rather than using raw and violent images or images without any connection with the relative message. The message would become less bloody and could also be taken to another level.

    About point 5. You could also follow a list of coping strategies to be implemented (see:

    I really like the idea of ​​separating the person from the behavior. In this regard, I would also avoid the comparison with subculture (gothic, emo) unless the issue deepened well, in order to avoid an identification that reinforcements the association subject identity/culture.
    The use of famous people can be dangerous, because it can induce justification or imitation anyway, However, deepening its history, giving it a less “mythical” aspect and more from being human with its fragility could be useful to a “healthy” identification, a see the human side and consequently soften the stigmatized vision of self linked to the time of being crazy, weak or otherwise.

    Regard the graphic, both in the prints and on the websites it would be desirable to use reassuring colors, not too strong, to avoid colors like red and black that could recall something else, and produce easy associations.

    Greetings and good work,
    Giuseppe Martorana

  • This is much-needed information that will be a great resource moving forward in NSSI reporting. Here are my comments/suggestions:

    For 1. and 3.– Did we discuss ISSS creating our own infographics for NSSI research/facts that can be used by media? I am wondering if either providing an infographic and/or providing key bullet points of facts would lead to media outlets being more apt to follow this recommendation. While the website already does a nice job presenting an overview of NSSI, I am somewhat concerned that this might still be seen as “too much” to those wanting to snag quick tidbits for their article.

    For 6., I’m wondering if it would be possible to include additional examples of what would be appropriate headlines– particularly if the article is specifically about NSSI more generally as opposed to being about an individual who engages in NSSI. For instance, would inclusion of NSSI in the title be appropriate provided that it is framed in such a way that highlights treatment/help-seeking (e.g. “What can Help your Child Recover from NSSI”)?

    I am also wondering if it would be a good idea to provide contact information of professionals in the field who would be willing to speak to the media about NSSI (which would contribute to 1 and 2 of “Recommendations for Disseminating these Guidelines”)

  • My 2c….

    1. “avoided and included” – they can’t do both for each recommendation. Consider re-wording
    2. Why are only the first three essential? Why are they more important than the others? If I follow this rule I can have a headline that reads:
    “Teens struggling to cope has seen an alarming increase in number of cutters mutilating their bodies”. Followed by comments that say: they deserve what they get; why don’t they do it properly
    3. Point 8 – perhaps recommend reporting actual rates rather than editorialising? This is prob a good example of where the balance between accuracy and reporting is required. Our biggest suicide prevention organisation recently got into trouble for reporting a 10% increase in number of suicides, with a later retraction that reported a rate of x per 100,000 instead.
    4. Point 3 under recommendations for dissemination – researchers could also benefit from media training

Comments are closed.