The Press still has not managed to learn the difference between "in the public interest" and "interesting" - as in taking a prurient interest in the private lives of people they consider to be public property - or sensationalising and misreporting events for their own benefit.
It raises an interesting question - when a person of interest is selectively reported by the press and the wrong impression is passed on to the public then who is guilty - the person of interest or the press? The answer from the press would appear to be the person of interest.

I don't quite agree that the subject of suicide requires any kind of deeper insight - it does, however, need deeper awareness. Not, it is to be agreed, in a prurient manner, but so that more people are aware of just how prevalent, serious and, yes, sensationalist it is. It SHOULD cause a sensation. After all, if a headline read "Well, done Australia, you've killed off a couple more kids" it would sell just as many papers and get just as many people hot under the collar as the seemingly nonsensical attitude taken in this instance.

And yes, speaking as a journalist myself, it is irresponsible journalism to take the line taken in this case: witness citizen k's post.

This kind of reporting leads to the impression that suicide only occurs to people who are different, or bad, or outcasts, or in any tiny way different to our own children, parents, partners or friends. Whereas suicide happens across all gender, class, occupation and age barriers and to people who are successful, loved, seemingly understood and outwardly happy and content.

It IS scary and we DO have responsibilities. Instead we perpetuate the myth that some agency other than ourselves is responsible. This in turn leads to inconsolable grief for those left behind, sends the subject even more underground, allows the rest of us to be complacent and judgemental and leads to more taking this way out.

I am not a great fan of news media and their methods of operation.
However, something is lacking in a society where this sort of tragedy can happen.
Should we go back to more face to face relationships rather than getting our reality through electronic media/ newspapers?

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Press Council guidelines on reporting suicide suggest that they not be reported at all. (Unless a person is of public interest, a mass suicide, or the circumstances are bizarre. I keep wondering if two people is a 'mass' or whether Jodie and Steph are regarded as bizarre.)

If they are reported, then the press Council recommends that the place and manner of the suicide should not be, because of the risk of 'copycat' behaviour. Yet, the manner of Jodie and Steph's death was in the news before the bodies had even been identified. My daughter found out more than she ever wanted to know about the death of her friend from the television news. That information should have come to her from someone who cared about her and about Jodie - not from a media outlet seeking ratings.

Most articles articles about Jodie and Steph mentioned the manner of their death, and some included a map of the location. While many articles mentioned the risk to the girls friends, they also at the same time stressed the 'emo' and MySpace links as though dressing in black and using a computer was somehow sinister. The Age published a link to Jodie's MySpace causing any friend listed there to be inundated with messages from ghouls and thrillseeekers the world over. There were requests for paid interviews as well. If these kids felt marginalised and misunderstood before, they feel it even more now.

Why were there TV cameras at Jodie's funeral? Why were grieving friends and family on the national news? My daughter learnt many things about the media and society from this experience and none of them were good.

Why does the Press Council issue guidelines if they are so blatantly disregarded?

The only loyalty of the media is to the media, and the media is doing it tough lately. Anyone who disputes this should note that the SMH is currently implementing its third round of redundancies in three years. This is because the advertising rivers of gold are drying up, and the very existence of the printed version of the Herald is under threat.

In these circumstances the media will cover whatever sells, and they know from long experience that war, crime, murder, etc are what sells. For that you can blame human nature.

With the internet liberating millions of people, particularly young people, from the control of an editor who could influence what they see and hear, the media is in the middle of the greatest restructure in its history. Expect them to be totally ruthless in pursuing their interests.

Excellent item Alexander. Few in the media even see this yet alone acknowledge it. The use of fear and the way the media jump at every tragedy, reporting them before they know anything. Theories just come out of the twisted heads of the people that write such rubbish. I couldn't call them reporters as they are not reporting. They are short story writers, fiction.

As usual there are both Coalition and Labor barrackers trying to make a political point here. I detest Howard more than I can say and yes he uses fear in every way possible. But he didn't invent it and he won't be the last.

It is the media that want to use every nasty little invention of their twisted, sick minds to try and sell a story. Just for a few bucks. Howard uses that at every opportunity and so will Rudd if he gets in.

On suicide. It's not a scary topic at all. People suicide all the time, more than reported. Not talking about it mystifies it and makes it seem a "romantic" thing to do if you like. It's not. I've been there and backed off obviously unless I'm writing from beyond.

Car accidents are one area where the media will not even speculate on what does happen. Some deliberately have an accident trying to kill themselves. I tried but was too scared I'd fail and end up a vegetable. I know many who have tried and failed too. Some of those hurt others and hate themselves for it. Pity they didn't think of that earlier but at that point you just want out.

Until our societies start to elect people who lead by example we will just continue to see more and more depression and suicides as people can't stand the way we are living and being led. It's all about a few bucks, nothing more. Money, an invention of man. It doesn't really exist if you think about it. But it is today's God. Not for me, it's fools gold.