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 with mrsmattie and have said this on the thread about the Manchester murders. I too find the 'i don't want to see headlines like this' attitude precious. It's not ACTAULLY happened to you for goodness sakes, its a few words.

why didn't anyone complain about the Baby P thread title?

So what's the criteria for a non invasive title. No description, just and 'omg, something terrible has happened'?? can't have 32 thread with the same title.

altho i do wonder about that these days.

mumsnet isn't just a tiptoe thru the tulips,as we all well know. What about all the thread titles with people swearing thier heads off.

PC- they did, extensivly and loudly.

People complain about swearing in titles too.. perfectly realsonable IMO, after all how hard is it to be sensitive and think about others in a thread title.

Hoochiemomma, I think there is a preference you can click in your reg to add "hide" to the thread titles as they come upnin active convos so you dont have to click on the thread itself everytime?

yes pirate cat - fuck everyone else. post what you want. Lowest common denominator rules.Why take two minutes posting 'please note graphic content' - why should you do that? Post anything , any time, any situation and just don't ever give a toss ever. Fucking jessies should just have it in their face. This is not mumsnet light FFS

Yeah . I am almost sure that is the way to go.

I sent an email to the editor of Times Online today, something I have never done before. I have Times Online set as my homepage and have a quick skim of the headlines to see if there is anything that interests me.

Today, right at the top was a headline about Baby P's mother telling her friends that she will be out by Christmas. A computer generated image was next to the story, showing a baby with a bruised face, presumably Baby P.

I am sure that I am not the only one to be upset by images such as that, and I find images particularly difficult to get out of my mind.

I agree that some details are needed in order to comprehend the sheer scale of misery that the child was subjected to and the comperhensive failure of the authorities to protect him. If one is so interested, then by all means read the article, buy the newspaper, click on the link.

We are not talking about censoring the story, just the headlines so that I can take my sensitive self over to cosy comforting threads that do not upset me.

If you cannot think of a more effective yet still less detailed title then you seriously lack imagination. It is not hard!

but how are you going to police this thread title stuff.

every title could mean something to someone?

Death, abortion, abuse, affairs, etc...

what was so offensive about that particular title???

It was factual. The same was just said by the newsreader on the LUNCHTIME news.

it is not about policing it.
It is about showing a small smidge of consideration and personally choosing to put an indication in the header that the content is graphic rather than posting a graphic header that gives people more info than they want. they can then ignore or click hide and peace will reign....

Piratecat
Of course it has not happened to me, but it has upset me. Perhaps I am precious, or oversensitive.

I had a friend over yesterday and she told me a detail about the Jamie Bulger case that I did not know and really really did not want to know. I was almost sick at the thought of it. I spent half the night thinking and dreaming about it and in my dreams it was my DS's face, not Jamie Bulgers.

Perhaps that is why I am reacting so strongly today, and if I am being precious then I apologise.

We are all of us upset by it. i just really don't understand how people can be upset by a thread title saying very basic facts.

This upsets me, that people find that upsetting.

PC, ok, you don't see it yourself. However, do you have the sensitivity to accept that other people might? I mean that is the point of this place isn't it, to have some awareness of other peoples feelings?

agreed. it goes both ways.

I agree with the OP.

thats the point tbh.

I actually don't find very much stuff upsetting. But I know that others do.
It is just consideration and moderation IMHO

Hi all,
We tend to allow Mumsnet to self-police in things like this - i.e. there is a general community pressure by way of suggestion/reminder to be sensitive in titles - rather than setting up hard and fast rules.

That said we can see that lots of people would rather not be confronted by the more gruesome news when they come to MN, so we are very happy to move things to the correct category (eg to In the News) if they're not posted up there and we'll also look at modifying and highlighting our Talk philosophy to give folks some guidance on this.

Thanks for raising it.

I suggested a totally separate topic for tragic and sad stories a year ago!

If only we'd listened, maybe you'd all still be here .

The thing is though if we had 'tragic and sad stories board' anyone who went on it would be conveyed a sicko who revells in the details as has already been demonstrated so therefore it would start more riots.

I think yes maybe titles should be changed and policed BUT how do we limit it?

For instance and just for example the Baby P thread with all the other graphic detail should maybe be changed too...

Baby P thread if there is only going to be one then, but then will people start complaining aout the cpomment under the heading and how far will it go?

Im being genuine BTW not starting an argument or nowt just being curious.

have to agree with Piratecat & Mrsmattie

just scrap the 'in the news' topic if it causes so much angst