The link between 13 Reasons Why and teen suicide

In the wake of a recent spike in teen suicide reportedly correlating with the release of 13 Reasons Why, our Pop Culture editor delves into whether media creatives should have boundless artistic licence, or a level of responsibility to look after their viewers. 

Netflix’s adaption of Jay Asher’s challenging novel 13 Reasons Why has come under scrutiny after a recent study – conducted by the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry – revealed that the rate of teen suicide rose exponentially in the month after the show’s premiere in April 2017.

The US study found that more Americans aged between 10 to 17 took their own lives that month than in any other month in over a five-year period, undermining Netflix’s intentions to create the ‘ultimate connector’ and ‘catalyst for conversation’ regarding mental health issues in young people.

Our current understanding of the interaction between pop culture and real-world consequences is fraught with naïve assumptions and fearmongering, and even the best research is far from irrefutable. However, history suggests that suicide is something of an exception to this state of ambiguity.

A notable example provides the basis for what is now known as the Werther Effect (essentially a real-life recreation of a fictional suicide). In 1774 suicide rates drastically increased following the release of Johann Wolfgang von Goethe’s powerful novel ‘The Sorrows of Young Werther,’ with many claiming that the material not only stirred a harmful impetus among young sufferers, but inadvertently revealed information about specific methods of suicide.

And similar criticisms have been directed at the Netflix show’s disturbing series one finale, in which the main protagonist Hannah Baker takes her own life in one of the most distressing scenes in entertainment, period.

Netflix has responded to this criticism with circumspection, claiming they had nothing but ‘good intentions’ for their ‘critically important’ story. But just how much responsibility rests on their shoulders, and are entertainment creatives ever truly responsible for the well-being of their consumers for that matter?

It’s an unfamiliar notion to suggest that storytelling should be limited/restricted to protect a viewership from real life issues, but it appears people may eventually demand it. There are already growing concerns that creative scope is being hindered by social constructs, with fans of the eminently popular Game of Thrones now fearful that the show’s end could signal the demise of ‘difficult’ storytelling.

It’s feasible to argue that the easily accessible nature of the material is the primary issue. Sure, sensitive episodes of 13 Reasons Why were bumped up to 18 rated and discretion warnings/disclaimers were plentiful, but I fail to believe the creators were naive enough to think that these failsafes alone would deter young teens from watching a hit show on the most popular streaming service ever.