The document discusses guidelines for engaging with social media for suicide prevention purposes. It summarizes outcomes from an Australian roundtable meeting between mental health, technology, and media organizations to discuss opportunities and risks of social media engagement for youth suicide prevention. Key priorities identified include developing best practice guidelines for clinical engagement online, guidelines for online moderation, and empowering young people. The Mindframe initiative has since conducted further consultations and research to inform social media guidelines and address issues like measuring duty of care responsibilities online and moderating user generated content.
Call Girls Visakhapatnam Just Call 9907093804 Top Class Call Girl Service Ava...
How to engage in 140 character or less #suicideprevention
1.
2. How to engage in 140 characters or less
#suicideprevention
Authors:
Jaelea Skehan - @jaeleaskehan (@HInstMH)
Jane Burns - @janeburns (@yawcrc)
Michelle Blanchard - @MischaBee (@yawcrc)
Marc Bryant - @MarcJamesBryant (@MindframeMedia)
3. Not for profit business unit
working on local and national
mental health and suicide
prevention programs and known
for translation of research into
practice.
The Mindframe National Media Initiative
(managed by the HIMH) is funded under the
National Suicide prevention program and
aims to influence media representation of
issues related to mental illness and
suicide, encouraging responsible, accurate
and sensitive portrayals. Mindframe works
with news and entertainment
media, universities, police and courts and
the mental health and suicide prevention
sector.
#AboutUs
The Young and Well CRC unites young people with researchers, practitioners,
innovators and policy-makers from over 70 partners organisations to explore the
role of technology in young people’s lives, and how technology can be used to
improve the mental health and wellbeing of young people.
4. Some things to consider about #technology
and #communication
• #Fact - We are the last generation that will know what it is like
to live in a world without computers;
• #Fact - Technology and the rise of social media means
communications are now done on a global scale instantly;
• #Fact - There are currently over 1.1 billion active users of
Facebook which equates to 1 in 7 people globally.
5. #PresentationOverview
• The speed and growth of social media is both an
opportunity and a challenge for those of us working in
suicide prevention. We should be both optimistic and
cautious.
• This paper will summarise outcomes of work in Australia
to better understand the opportunities and risks when
thinking about social media and suicide prevention.
• It draws on recent work conducted as a partnership
between The Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre
and the Hunter Institute of Mental Health as well as
additional follow-up work conducted under the
Mindframe National media Initiative.
6. #CollaborativeAction in Australia – outcomes of a
National Roundtable to discuss young people, social
media and suicide prevention
#Fact - Technology (including social media) is no longer just
important to young people but a core and fundamental part of
who they are and how they connect.
7. #AboutTheRoundTable
• Social media was both everybody’s business and nobody’s business in
Australia.
• In February 2013 more than 50 representatives from Australia’s leading
youth, mental health, media and technology providers came together
to tackle the risks, challenges and opportunities presented by social
media to promote mental health and suicide prevention.
• The roundtable, was hosted by the Young and Well Cooperative
Research Centre and the Mindframe National Media Initiative
(managed by the Hunter Institute of Mental Health).
• The roundtable was the start of a process to define and agree on a
collaborative approach to minimise the risks and enhance the benefits
that social media may provide to young people in distress.
8. #KeyOutcomes
The purpose was to identify both the benefits and risks of engaging with
young people through social media and the role that the mental health
sector, technology partners, the media, researchers, other stakeholders and
young people themselves can play.
Five key priorities (and associated actions) were identified:
#Issue1: The research is having trouble keeping up with the technology
#Issue2: Guidelines for safe & effective online engagement are needed
#Issue3: Young people need to be empowered online
#Issue4: Postvention activity online requires immediate action
#Issue5: Innovation and collaboration are keys to success
9. Let’s look at just one priority in more detail:
#Issue2: Guidelines for safe & effective online engagement are
needed
10. #Issue2: Concerns raised
• Cross –sector approaches to engagement online were seen as variable.
While some organisations are risk-adverse and avoid direct engagement,
others are more proactive and may be unaware of their duty of care.
• Sectors that communicate and engage with young people online would
benefit from a set of consistent best-practice guidelines. These guidelines
should be updated as the evidence develops.
• Sectors identified included: clinical service providers, communication
teams for mental health organisations, education departments and
schools, the media, and other online influencers.
• Specific issues identified included: moderation of closed and open forums,
safe and effective promotional materials and engagement; duty of care for
individuals and services, interface between social media and other sectors
and services, global nature of the online environment.
11. #Issue2: Actions identified
1. Develop best-practice guidelines for clinical and service
engagement;
2. Develop best-practice principles for online moderation;
3. Enhance Mindframe guidelines to include communication using
social media for:
– Media professionals;
– Communication staff of health organisations;
– Online influencers such as bloggers.
Incorporated into Mindframe Project Plan 2013-2014.
12. #MindframeActions to progress Australian priorities –
a snapshot from a series of consultations and studies
with journalists, journalism educators and
communication staff in mental health organisations
13. #Issues for Mindframe
• Mindframe recognises the interface between new media
technologies and traditional news reporting;
• To be current and relevant we have to think about the media world
that we live in;
• The speed of online news communication impacts upon the ethical
and legal responsibilities of journalistic practice;
• The Mindframe Initiative is interested in addressing the potential
role and impact that social media has on the reporting of suicide
deaths and the way journalists engage online;
• The Mindframe Initiative provides advice on the way the mental
health and suicide prevention sector communicates about suicide
and this needs to consider online communication.
14. #UseOfSocialMedia
Two social media profile analyses conducted by @DialogueAus revealed:
• Media are major users of social media:
– Most major outlets had at least one social media channel. Twitter is
the social network of choice;
– Media outlets were the most influential in terms of the number of
followers. However, they had less engagement than individual
journalists did.
• The mental health & sector is on social media:
– 120 organisations has a presence in social media;
– 70% have a Twitter account and 60% have a Facebook presence;
– 15 ‘big players’ had more than 3000 Twitter followers;
– 19 of the 91 Facebook presences identified were automatically
generated pages populated with content from Wikipedia.
15. #Issues for the Mental Health Sector
The profile analyses and case-studies highlighted a range of considerations
for the mental health sector. Three examples include:
1. How do we measure duty of care? Does ‘proximity’ apply online? Is it
different for clinicians and communication staff?
If tweeting for @MindframeMedia or @HInstMH, does Jaelea (psychologist)
have a different ethical obligation when tweeting to Marc (journalist)?
2. Many services only operate social media channels from 9-5, but most social
media use by young people happens at night. This poses questions about
how interactions are moderated.
If you are a 24/7 service should your social media be 24/7 as well? Do people
know the difference between the service and the social media presence for the
service?
3. Official social media channels for mental health organisatons ‘promoted’
(e.g. retweeted) media stories about suicide.
Given the evidence about media reporting of suicide and potential risks, is this
ethical? Are risky stories still an opportunity to promote your service?
16. #Consultation with Mindframe stakeholders
To support the national roundtable, Mindframe ran focus-group style
consultations with three of it’s national reference groups:
1. Mindframe Media Advisory Group – including senior journalists and
editors from media organisations from across Australia;
2. Mindframe Journalism and Public Relations Advisory group – including
academics from across Australia who teach journalism or public
relations;
3. Mindframe Communication Managers’ group – including the
communication managers from major mental health and suicide
prevention organsiations and professional bodies in Australia.
17. • Use of social media is wide-spread and extensive and most commonly
used for promotion and engagement;
• Journalists used social media to source stories and talent;
• Perceive lack of control was identified as a major issue – once information
is posted the anything can happen to it;
• Generally staff training about using the technology as well as identifying
and managing risks was limited;
• Moderating user-generated content was seen as a major challenge;
• The legalities of using social media to communicate (or having people post
to your site) was generally unknown;
• People found it difficult to differentiate between personal and professional
accounts and whether the same ‘rules’ applied on both.
#SummaryOfOutcomes
19. #FinalReflections
• We need to be consistent
• Having different ‘guidelines’ for media, community, academics and
clinicians should not be an option. We need to work across sectors to
ensure a consistent approach.
• Let’s think global rather than national
• Given the internet is global, should collaborative action and response be
global rather than national?
• Can international partnerships for moderation and engagement be a
solution to the 24/7 nature of the internet?
• Researcher needs to be quick and practical
• Technology is changing all the time, so research needs to be quick,
flexible and immediately relevant in practice – does this mean a change
to traditional research models?
20. The presentation and associated reports will be available from
www.mindframe-media.info
Contact with us online:
@MindframeMedia
@yawcrc
If anyone has questions from the presentation you can tweet
@jaeleaskehan or email Jaelea.Skehan@hnehealth.nsw.gov.au
Notas do Editor
The purpose of the Hunter Institute of Mental Health is to promote mental health and wellbeing and to prevent mental ill-health and suicide, through education and training, health promotion, research and evaluation. The Institute id know for their expertise in translating research into practice in both mental health and suicide prevention. The Mindframe National Media Initiative (managed by the Hunter Institute of Mental Health) is funded under the National Suicide prevention program and aims to influence media representation of issues related to mental illness and suicide, encouraging responsible, accurate and sensitive portrayals by working with: The news media and journalists; Universities offering journalism & PR; Film and television; Mental health and suicide prevention sector; Police and courts The Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre unites young people with researchers, practitioners, innovators and policy-makers from over 70 partners organisationsacross the not-for-profit, academic, government and corporate sectors to explore the role of technology in young people’s lives, and how technology can be used to improve the mental health and wellbeing of young people aged 12 to 25.
The next few slides provide a summary of a collaborative roundtable in Australia and the outcomes which have started to shape action in the area.
Really the roundtable cam about because it was relevant to many (if not all services and sectors in Australia) but no one organisation was funded to address the issue. So two of the national organisations – Mindframe (that focusses on media reporting) and the Young and Well CRC (focussing on research, technology and young people) decided to jointly bring the sectors together. Existing funds were used and attendees paid their own way so this was not about an organisations positioning themselves for funding or work. In February 2013more than 50 representatives from Australia’s leading youth, mental health, media and technology providers came together in Melbourne to tackle the risks, challenges and opportunities presented by social media to promote mental health and suicide prevention in young people.- Representatives included CEOs and Directors of youth mental health organisations, key suicide prevention researchers, Industry partners like Facebook and Yahoo, young people, media representatives, clinicians and people in communication roles in mental health organisations. The roundtable, was hosted by the Young and Well Cooperative Research Centre and the Mindframe National Media Initiative (managed by the Hunter Institute of Mental Health). The event was facilitated by National Mental Health Commissioner, Sam Mostyn.The roundtable was the start of a process to define and agree on a collaborative approach to minimise the risks and enhance the benefits that social media may provide to young people in distress.
The workshop was designed to get views from the people who came together rather than having too many formal presentations. The outcomes from two workshop activities were coded and analysed revealing 5 key priorities. Each priority also had a range of suggested actions so that different organisations may be tasked with moving the work forward and progress could be tracked (and duplication uncovered). Five key priorities (and associated actions) were identified:#Issue1: The research is having trouble keeping up with the technology#Issue2: Guidelines for safe & effective online engagement are needed#Issue3: Young people need to be empowered online#Issue4: Postvention activity online requires immediate action#Issue5: Innovation and collaboration are keys to success
There isn’t time to go through all 5 areas, but the one most relevant to Mindframe will be explored further. A digital report is available on the Young and Well and Mindframe websites.
Cross –sector approaches to engagement online were seen as variable. While some organisations are risk-adverse and avoid direct engagement, others are more proactive and may be unaware of their duty of care. Sectors that communicate and engage with young people online would benefit from a set of consistent best-practice guidelines. These guidelines should be updated as the evidence develops. Sectors identified included: clinical service providers, communication teams for mental health organisations, education departments and schools, the media, and other online influencers. Specific issues identified included: moderation of closed and open forums – do we have standards and best practice of how to moderate comments and interactions? safe and effective promotional materials and engagement – how does the sector communicate with and engage using social media; duty of care for individuals and services – many services never considered that this type of engagement (where there is interaction) may not be the same as PR using traditional media – so what do you do when someone identified as at risk? What training or support is given to people managing social media chanels? interface between social media and other sectors and services, global nature of the online environment – media and social media are no longer completely separate in the digital age so what does this mean for media guidelines?
Develop best-practice guidelines for clinical and service engagement;Develop best-practice principles for online moderation;Enhance Mindframe guidelines to include communication using social media for:Media professionals;Communication staff of health organisations;Online influencers such as bloggers.The third action fits within the scope of Mindframe and so the recommendations have been incorporated into the project plan for 2013-2014. Mindframe is working with its national reference groups and stakeholders to enhance media resources to include recommendations about social media, will lead work to develop practice-standards for those who manage social media channels for the mental health and suicide prevention sector – and develop a strategy to engage bloggers and other social media commentators. So far, the media and other sectors have responded positively to this direction and believe it is timely and important.
In the second part of the presentation with be just some snapshots from a range of work Mindframe has done to better understand how thei target sectors use social media, what they use, potential risks to be managed and the best ways to progress the work given the lack of research evidence to guide practice.
Mindframe recognises the interface between new media technologies and traditional news reporting – with practically all media organisations now having an online presence, there is no clear distinction between traditional and new media. To be current and relevant we have to think about the media world that we live in – in fact in consultations for the review of Mindframe resources, advice about social media and their online media platforms was considered not only desirable but necessary. The speed of online news communication impacts upon the ethical and legal responsibilities of journalistic practice – journalists themselves have reported the speed of online news to be a barrier to reporting on sensitive issues like suicide that need time. So recommendations that work in that environment are needed.The Mindframe Initiative is interested in addressing the potential role and impact that social media has on the reporting of suicide deaths and the way journalists engage online;The Mindframe Initiative provides advice on the way the mental health and suicide prevention sector communicates about suicide and this needs to consider online communication – so ensuring that communicators in our sector adhere to similar principles to the media is iomportant.
Two social media profile analyses conducted by Dialogue Consulting (social media company) for Mindframe to investigate who used social media, what channels and also presented some case studies that illustrated specific challenges. A snapshot of usage:Media are major users of social media:Most major outlets had at least one social media channel. Twitter is the social network of choice;Media outlets were the most influential in terms of the number of followers. However, they had less engagement than individual journalists did. The mental health & sector is on social media:120 organisations has a presence in social media;70% have a Twitter account and 60% have a Facebook presence; 15 ‘big players’ had more than 3000 Twitter followers; 19 of the 91 Facebook presences identified were automatically generated pages populated with content from Wikipedia.
There were a number of issues outlined from the case-studies collected online. Just three are presented here for consideration. How do we measure duty of care? Does ‘proximity’ apply online? Is it different for clinicians and communication staff? If tweeting for @MindframeMedia or @HInstMH, does Jaelea (psychologist) have a different ethical obligation when tweeting to Marc (journalist)? So do professional ethics come into play – if someone suggests they may be suicidal to a psychologist is that different to a journalist? None of our current practice standards or codes really make this clear, not have many organisations considered it. Many services only operate social media channels from 9-5, but most social media use by young people happens at night. This poses questions about how interactions are moderated. If you are a 24/7 service should your social media be 24/7 as well? Do people know the difference between the service and the social media presence for the service? Do people in the communty understand they can’t get a service through the twiietr account? Official social media channels for mental health organisatons ‘promoted’ (e.g. retweeted) media stories about suicide. – many of our organisations link to media stories about suicide deaths – often to promote their own servcie, but what is the impact of this? Given the evidence about media reporting of suicide and potential risks, is this ethical? Are risky stories still an opportunity to promote your service?
To support the national roundtable, Mindframe ran focus-group style consultations with three of it’s national reference groups:Mindframe Media Advisory Group – including senior journalists and editors from media organisations from across Australia;This also includes Indigenous media, LGBTI media, Rural media, CALD media and large major dailies, radio and TV. Mindframe Journalism and Public Relations Advisory group – including academics from across Australia who teach journalism or public relations;Mindframe Communication Managers’ group – including the communication managers from major mental health and suicide prevention organsiations and professional bodies in Australia.
Use of social media is wide-spread and extensive and most commonly used for promotion and engagement;Journalists used social media to source stories and talent; -- this ranged from people approaching them, making direct contact, putting out a general call for assistace over social media to “trolling” on facebook groups for story leads (as occurred in some communities affected by suicide). Perceive lack of control was identified as a major issue – once information is posted the anything can happen to it; Generally staff training about using the technology as well as identifying and managing risks was limited; - generally staff were only given training in “how to use” rather than anything about ethics, risks or ways to manage their own responses to content on social media. Moderating user-generated content was seen as a major challenge; - people’s comments need to be closely monitored and moderated – making it time consuming and almost impossive in the 24/7 nature of social media. The legalities of using social media to communicate (or having people post to your site) was generally unknown;People found it difficult to differentiate between personal and professional accounts and whether the same ‘rules’ applied on both.
Note that the Mindframe resources are currently being reviewd 9due for release now we have a new government). The books will be very short with more information going online and an APP for media being developed. This will include tips for social media interactions.