MNHQ - please can we have some kind of header on the News Section?

[NCbirdy]

Please? Just one that says (in fairly large type so everyone notices ) "To avoid upsetting other posters, please ensure that thread titles do not included graffic or detailed information."

It is a little thing I know but at the moment I feel physically sick each time I click on active convos and see yet another horrific act described in the thread titles.

I understand that the acts need to be noticed, I know everyone wants to jump up and down and shout about it but they can do that even without a graffic thread title!

I don't want to hide news as there are lots of very interesting news stories on there that I do not want to miss out on simply because of selfish and thoughtless titles.

Please MNHQ?

agree NC.

Agree, I'm flinching at active convos every time I look atm.

i'm with you on this one

I agree, large type, in capitals with lots of

Agreed but I'm not sure how much difference it'd make. I've only got to see the words Baby P and I feel like crying. Maybe there ought to be a sensitive story sub category? I know it's cowardly but I really can't deal with it.

I know that we should all be horrified by these things, and I am, however, I would like to have control over how much detail I pick up on a case and when. If I know there is a thread about Baby P or something then I can decide right, I will not read this tonight just before bed as it will upset me, I will get the details in the morning when I can handle the information properly. (or something)

It may not make much of a difference but at least we can all flame people who do it if they have been asked, politley, not to do it!

At the end of the day it is just sensationalism, trying to get as many people as possible to click on your thread and feel as horrified as you do. I do not want to be made to feel like this just to satisfy someone elses ego thank you!

Do you have to walk into the newsagents with your eyes closed?

The news is generally not 'good'. I'd just hide the topic completely if headlines upset you so much.

Ditto MrsMattie.

i have started my 3rd thread asking people to do that.

And MrsMattie yes we know they can be hidden but the fact is i don't want to them in the first place. Most regular MNetters know to avoid putting sensitive stories in the title

I agree with NCbirdy - and even if you hide the In THe News topic, it's still leaking out into other topics, such as Chat, that you might not want to hide.

a little thought and sensitivity is not too much to ask, surely?

MrsMattie, put very simply, I AM NOT IN A NEWSAGENT I AM ON A PARENTING SITE, if I choose to walk into a newsagent I would know that I will be faced with this. If I choose to see who has been discussing, breastpads, cleaning and the price of petrol then I do not expect to see this stuff.

It makes me so angry when people use such ridiculous arguments. I did not ask for good news I just asked for well thought out thread titles.

Sorry, I just don't get it. There are only a few threads and they are nothing worse than a newspaper headline.

In my opinion, it's in poor taste to keep banging on about how 'offended' you are about this, actually. Get some perspective.

agree with mrs mattie

There are now more hysterical threads about this than there are original threads. Pretty pathetic.

i think on a community forum it is fair to ask people to consider whether or not a thread title is likely to offend/upset. if i go into a newsagents, i can easily avoid looking at the papers..

Mrsmattie, I appreciate your input and acknowledge your views.

I don't really know why this is causing angst. I have seen several thread on different subjects with some kind of 'warning - upsetting content' in the heading. Just the same as when people head gross threads with TMI.
It seems to me to be a perfectly reasonable thing to do. I am not sure why not wanting to stumble on to graphic aspects of a relevent case would be such an issue.
It is surely a matter of taste/decency/opinion etc . Why not just be aware of other peoples choices and be a little considerate.

The whole 'well if you live in the whole world you are going to encounter these things is bollocks. The issues is in the open. The ammount of detail bandied about absolutely IS a matter of taste and decency or there would be autopsey pictures in the newspaper. It seems to me that the 'its just real life' brigade are actually saying that the line should be where we have chosen to draw it.

I think the thread titles have put me off reading and posting tbh.
If I want to hear the news I'll read it in my own time.

I log on to MN to see how everyone here is - well done misdee - not to talk about the news.

For me thankfully, I can live my life without a TV and without getting newspapers. I survive very well on hourly bulletins from my radio, and from my reddit roundup, I read a lot also.

I don't come on to MN to read the news, or someone's graphic thread about some incident.

I vote that the titles are toned down.

I am in blissful ignorance as to what is going on but suspect that is because I have hidden the news section for this very reason. I would however like to have a look as am interested in some of the other things that have been happening but don't dare at the moment.

I manage extremely well to walk past the papers in the garage without looking when I want to which I did earlier as am aware of an awful abuse story which I don't want to know the details of.

It doesn't take a lot to be careful of what you post in the title so I think this idea is very reasonable.

I usually have the news on the tv in the morning as I am geetting up but turned it off today. The graphic they and the press are using was way too much for my 6 year old DD. It is IMHO an extraordinarily difficult image to be shown on breakfast news.

I would imagine that Editorial meetings are in overdrive currently. Radio 5 was quite interesting. A clearly upset Peter Allen gave a few minutes introduction to the item saying that whilst the detail is graphic it is very difficult to convey without it the extent of the 'failures' of the support agencies .
I thought it was an interesting comment.

I agree that we need to know at least some detail to know how terribly the system has failed, or to know how awful a situation really is. I know that, but I still think it can be easily and happily limited to the content of the thread! I would disagree with anyone saying that things should not be discussed at all, they need to be discussed (although I had hoped for more constructive discussion tbh)

NCbirdy.
I was agreeing with you - I was just adding to my more detailed comment posted up a bit..

Pag, I wasn't disagreeing with you either, I was expanding on the point from my perspective for others who may read the thread!

shall we just keep agreeing with each other and ignore everyone else.