Reporting hunger strikes in the context of climate action

Abstract

Climate activists have increasingly used hunger strikes to gather media attention to perceived inaction on the issue; however, there is little guidance for journalists about how they should approach such a story. Applying social responsibility theory to understand the media’s lack of action, and using a case study from an Australian climate hunger striker, this article set out to answer three questions: Should hunger strikes be treated by the media in the same way as suicide, or as a political protest action? Will providing coverage of a hunger strike encourage others to follow suit? And, if the media decides to cover a hunger strike, what if any mitigating factors could be used? Our work concludes that hunger strikes arise from political motivation, are newsworthy and should be covered, but editors must exercise caution, so as not to encourage imitation. Finally, we recommend that helplines should be included in reporting.

Introduction

While news headlines and scientific reports continue to tell us the climate emergency is worsening, climate activists are increasingly taking more extreme measures to draw the public's attention to the relevant issues and general government inaction over the problem. Protests have used aged-old demonstrator techniques such as chaining or glueing themselves to major infrastructure and unfurling banners on prominent buildings but also taking innovative approaches to attracting media attention such as using visually appealing costumes and targeting famous artworks for graffiti. One other way of drawing attention to issues has been through hunger strikes, popularised in the Western world through the activism of Gandhi, and successfully used to force a change in government policy by child asylum seekers in Australia.

This article focuses particularly on a case study of one climate hunger striker from Australia in November 2023, and draws upon the literature across journalism, communication and psychology, to tease out the ethical issues that must be considered in providing mainstream news coverage for such events. Specifically, it asks,

RQ1: Should hunger strikes be treated by the media in the same way as suicide or as a political protest action?

RQ2: Will providing media coverage of a hunger strike encourage others to follow suit?

RQ3: If the media decides to cover a hunger strike, what if any mitigating factors could be used?

At the outset, we acknowledge that hunger strikes are not the only kind of protest action taken by climate activists that can be potentially lethal or cause self-harm. Clearly, a person who climbs a monopole or glues their hands to the road at a busy intersection is putting themselves at risk for the cause.

But we accept that climate anxiety, climate distress, climate change anxiety or eco-anxiety is real (Clayton et al., 2017) and there is genuine concern among health professionals that it may exacerbate existing conditions like depression, anxiety disorders and substance use disorders which are more frequently diagnosed in the young (Wu et al., 2020). School children and young adults are often in attendance in large numbers at climate action marches and regularly feature in news stories discussing their anxiety about climate change. In 2023, a survey of 1900 young people aged 15 to 19 found 26% were ‘very concerned’ or ‘extremely concerned’ about climate change, and 38% were experiencing high psychological distress (Touma & Davey, 2023).

Climate anxiety was first defined by the American Psychological Association in 2017 as a chronic fear of environmental doom. In 2019, The Good Grief Network in the US and the Climate Psychology Alliance in the UK were reporting they were being inundated with requests for support for eco-anxiety sufferers (Nugent, 2019). Since that time, there has been an increase in the number of people – particularly young people – reporting anxiety, depression and suicidal ideation as a result of climate change (Taylor, 2023). The American Psychiatrists Association considers the issue ‘a significant and growing threat to public health in general and to mental health in particular’ (Block, 2024).

On 2 November 2023, former Australian diplomat Gregory Andrews, who has a high public profile in Australia for a range of reasons including his work as the Threatened Species Commissioner and a High Commissioner in resource-rich West Africa under the Liberal Coalition Government, started a hunger strike outside the national parliament calling for climate action. On his Instagram account, he posted a video, hashtagged #climatehungerstrike #climatecollapse #climateaction @albomp @tanyaplibersek @chrisbowenmp @adambandt @davidpocock @allegra.spender @zalisteggall in which he said he would not eat until a series of demands had been met by the Albanese Labor Government (Andrews, 2023b). The climate strike ended a little over two weeks later on 17 November when he was taken to hospital by ambulance with a heart condition. His action did not result in any publicly reported action by the Albanese government.

Andrews’ hunger strike was not publicly endorsed by any of the major Australian climate action groups or NGOs such as the Climate Council, Greenpeace, the Australian Conservation Foundation, and WWF. We further found no statements from any of the groups about why these climate-aligned organisations did not support Andrews’ action, and therefore can make no claims about whether or not it was a result of a deliberate decision not to support such action, or Andrews, in particular (Morton, 2022).

Andrews’ hunger strike received limited coverage from the mainstream media (45 individual articles or items) but independent media organisations did cover the strike, and Andrews himself penned articles and continually updated his social media account on Instagram, with publicly accessible posts about the motivations for the strike, visitors he had received, and his weight loss.

At the time of Andrews’ hunger strike, there was a call for a Synchronized Global Hunger Strike for Climate from an organisation calling themselves the Global Wave of Climate Action. On its website, the group said a global hunger strike would:

capture the attention of policymakers, business leaders, and communities worldwide, urging them to prioritise the urgent challenges we face and work towards a sustainable and resilient future for all. (Climate, 2023)

It was not clear from the media coverage or statements posted by Andrews online if his action was timed to coincide with this global action or was part of it. However, in news reports about his hunger strike, he referenced the timing of action along with the 2023 COP conference in Dubai.

Media coverage of Andrews’ hunger strike

As noted above, Andrews’ action did not garner much mainstream coverage, particularly from legacy news outlets. Nonetheless, it is interesting to look briefly at how the action was reported by a mix of media including commercial, public media, independent, and social media.

We used a Google search of Andrews’ name two months after the event (in January 2024) to identify around 45 separate publications/broadcasts about the action in Australia. We specifically used Google to find works that were freely available to readers and not hidden behind paywalls. We then did a content analysis to see how the media responded to the potentially life-threatening action.

On the right-leaning commercial news outlet, Sky News, Australia's best-known climate sceptic Andrew Bolt interviewed Andrews a week into the action, introducing his guest by calling him a climate alarmist. Andrews left the interview after arguing with Bolt over the questions. The main questions and answers were (Andrews, 2023a):

Bolt asked: ‘Is it fair or mature to stage this hostage drama, featuring yourself, where you say, do as I say, or I’ll kill myself’.

Andrews answered: ‘Yes, I do, because the only person who will suffer is me. My 83-year-old mother is fully behind me, my wife and my children are fully behind me…’

Bolt continued: ‘They (the government) cannot do what you want them to do, it would devastate the economy and it would devastate the federal budget, and a lot of Australians would suffer and it cannot happen in the two weeks you’ve got to live if you stop eating, you’ll be dead in a couple of weeks…

Andrews responded: ‘I have not said we need to phase out fossil fuels in the next two weeks. We need a hard and real commitment from the Albanese government to break free from Australia's fossil fuel addiction and I’m doing that for my children and for my country, because I want my children to grow up on a safe planet…’

The interview continued after Andrews left, with Bolt ending the segment saying, ‘I wish you were a better parent’.

There were no warnings on the online story on Sky about the subject matter, and none raised by Bolt himself. While this interview was factual in nature its format was that of current affairs as distinct from news, which explains the host's expression of opinion and editorial position on the issue.

After Andrews was admitted to hospital with a heart issue, he was quoted by news.com saying that he had not expected the Prime Minister to meet with him, but he appeared surprised that ‘they didn’t acknowledge it was even an issue’ (Campbell, 2023).

My key message to the Prime Minister is that I was never alone on the lawns of Parliament House – and it would be a very big mistake to think I was just one person. (Andrews in Campbell, 2023)

There were no warnings on the online story on news.com.

The national broadcaster, the ABC, published one story on its news website 14 days after the hunger strike started, and this one article was updated with an editors’ note when the strike ended on 17 November when he was taken to hospital (Midena & Lusted, 2023).

The reasons for Andrews’ taking the action were low in their placement within the story, which also included no warnings on ABC's online version.

One of the highest circulation newspapers in Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald published one story on the hunger strike when Andrews was taken to hospital ending his hunger strike, on November 17 (Foley, 2023). The article noted that the action had been taken against the advice of Andrews’ doctor, but with the support of his wife and children. It also noted how much weight he had lost and that one of the independent MPs who had visited him during the action, who was also a medical doctor, had urged him to quit the strike for the sake of his health. No members of the two major parties in the Australian Parliament spoke to him during the strike. The article quoted Andrews saying:

I don’t want to die, but I do want the Australian government and [Prime Minister] Anthony Albanese to show courage, and for [Opposition Leader] Peter Dutton to stop using climate change as a political weapon for his own advantage. I may or may not be able to stop dangerous climate change, but at least in my heart, I’ll feel better for having tried. (Foley, 2023)

The independent news site Mamamia provided a long feature on the hunger strike after Andrews appeared on Bolt's program and included a link to a petition he started (Ross, 2023). The article went into detail about what fluids Andrews was consuming and how he was sleeping in his home each night. It also pointed out that Andrews’ GP did not support the action because he had an enlarged heart. In it, Andrews was quoted discussing some of the abuse he was receiving on social media. Many of the messages said: ‘I hope you die’.

It also detailed Andrews’ mental state, including the impact of climate change on his well-being.

I actually got climate grief, or ecological grief, at the beginning of this year. I found it really devastating to see what science was showing us about the impact and the looming tipping points. To see Tanya Plibersek approve her fourth coal mine since she'd been the Minister for the Environment really hurt… Also, as a person of shared Aboriginal and European descent, I feel a real attachment to the bush and our animals, so seeing the impact was heartbreaking too. (Andrews in Ross, 2023)

An article on Yahoo News written by its environment editor focussed on Andrews’ physical stature (thinly built) and information about his diet of salt and water (Dahlstrom, 2023). The article, which was among the most sympathetic/supportive of the action in its tone, also clearly listed Andrews’ five key demands and government responses (or lack of responses). The Yahoo article, written 13 days into the action, provided more detail about Andrews’ physical state than any others, including his low blood sugar, described him as ‘wasting away’ and provided photos to demonstrate how much weight had been lost. It also included no warnings about the action.

On the social media platform Reddit, a post halfway into Andrews’ hunger strike attracted 62 comments and 75 interactions. The most upvoted comment was about Andrews’ previous political affiliations through his employment with the government while the Liberal Party was in power. There was no discussion of the ethical issues of the coverage of such an action or any warnings about following his lead (r/WesternAustralia, 2023).

Andrews’ own social media account on Instagram provided continual updates to his 1.2k followers (as of January 2024). He also wrote about the experience and the lack of political response for the independent blog, Pearls and Irritations, in November. He started by noting that he ended the strike when he was taken to hospital on the same day as the day the Earth reached its first two-degree plus temperature anomaly relative to the preindustrial baseline (Andrews, 2023c).

Articles were also published on non-news sites, including by the Centre for Climate Safety. That article, last updated the day after Andrews’ hunger strike had ended, pointed to his petition and clearly listed his five stated goals before detailing every day of the action. This article also included a link to the Global Hunger Strike for Climate page and other hunger strike actions taken in Melbourne (Aidt, 2023). It embedded multiple posts from Andrews’ personal Instagram account and from public statements, he had made over time about the environment, including from his time as High Commissioner in Ghana and as Australia's Threatened Species Commissioner. The article did not include any warnings, and by posting a link to the Global Hunger Strike for Climate page, it could be seen to be encouraging others into such action.

Articles in The Australian and The Herald Sun were not reviewed for this research as they were behind paywalls and therefore not available to readers in a Google search, unless they were already subscribers.

Australia's mainstream news organisations took a conservative approach to the coverage of Andrews’ hunger strike, with most only reporting after it had ended. Somewhat sympathetic coverage came from the environmental reporter at Yahoo and from the writer for Mamamia, which was the only outlet to provide a warning about the content. Sky News was most dismissive of the issue, ridiculing the action.

A responsible press

When reviewing the media coverage of Andrew's hunger strike we considered if it was possible that journalists decided not to cover the story due to a sense of allegiance to the social responsibility theory of the press (Siebert et al., 1973, 1956) which encourages newsmakers to consider the best interests of the community during the production of news and to avoid reports which spread fear and panic. However, we argue that those journalists who postponed or delayed coverage of climate change hunger strikes must now consider if they are acting in a way that is now actually socially irresponsible.

It is clear that in our interpretation of social responsibility theory in 2024, it is important for journalists to consider the two conditions that must be satisfied when the theory is applied: firstly, the event must be it must be ethical to cover and, secondly, it must also be newsworthy. For this, we can look to the application of news values to determine its newsworthiness and to the social responsibility theory of the media as expressed in the MEAA Code of Ethics as guidance.

As this event was political in origin, as well as design and expression, rather than self-harming in intent, it was ethical to cover as part of journalism's role in reflecting and shaping society's values. Furthermore, it warranted coverage sooner than it received from these outlets based on the news values of Conflict (in this case, political conflict) and Currency (due to the climate emergency) as well as a general application of Proximity to an Australian reader. When describing the news value of Currency, Conley and Lamble advise that journalists ‘must determine the strength and relevance of any new comment or circumstance and assess what, if anything, adds to the debate’ (Conley & Lamble, 2006). In this case, while the issue of climate emergency has been in existence for some time, this re-emergence of the issue as the cause of Andrew's hunger strike satisfies this criterion. A recent hunger strike in South Australia involving a ‘notorious armed robber’ (Vikhrov, 2024) who began his protest at being moved to a different prison received mainstream media coverage at the time his hunger strike began. This story satisfied several news values such as Conflict (due to the violent nature of the crimes), Unusualness (due to the notoriety of his offending) and Proximity (particularly to readers and viewers in South Australia, where the crimes were committed). It could also be argued that the news value of Unusualness also applies in both of these cases, due to the rarity of such expressions in Australia. While it did not satisfy as many news values as the Andrews case, the immediate coverage of the South Australian prison hunger strike demonstrates its validity on the grounds of newsworthiness.

Methodology

As outlined above, we used a Google search in January 2024 to finalise the articles that reported upon Andrews’ hunger strike, because we wanted to find media works that every day people would be able to access, rather than only news articles behind paywalls.

We also conducted a review of the academic literature in January 2024 using the terms ‘media’, ‘hunger’ and ‘strike’ as search terms. We used the term ‘media’ to make our search broader than legacy newspapers and also to try to capture media that younger people are more likely to consume. We found 23 results in the Web of Science database and 46 results in the SCOPUS database, though none were relevant to this inquiry. Two results were found in the APA Psych Info (Ovid) database, which referred to the psychiatric care of hunger strikers in prison. The Business Source Ultimate (EBSCO Host) produced 16 results, although not all were peer reviewed. The CINAHL (EBSCO Host), Embase (via Ovid), ERIC (via ProQuest) and Health Collection (via InfoRMIT) database were also searched but provided no data relevant to this inquiry beyond the two results previously found in the APA Psych Info database. The search terms were widened to the words: ‘media’, ‘hunger’, ‘strike’, ‘reporting’ and ‘guidelines’. We found 13 results in the Applied Social Sciences Index & Abstracts (ASSIA) (ProQuest) database and no results in the SCOPUS, Health Collection, Humanities & Social Sciences Collection, Rural and Remote Health Database (RURAL), AGIS Plus Text, Australian Public Affairs Full Text (APAFT), Australian Public Affairs Full Text (APAFT) Families & Society Collection, Australian Public Affairs Full Text (APAFT) databases.

Of the results found, none were directly relevant to journalism, and many applied the search terms in a medical or health context. As no journal articles specifically dealing with the ethical issues in covering hunger strikes by journalists were found, this research therefore drew on articles dealing with mental health conditions and existing works on journalism ethics. We further used a case study of one hunger strike and conducted a limited content analysis of the reporting of that event.

Literature review

We uncovered four main themes in the literature by looking at: definitions of hunger strikes, forms of political protest involving self-harm such as self-immolation; advice for journalists working with issues connected with suicide (specifically contagion and stigma, and cognitive constriction); and journalism decision-making.

Hunger strikes

A hunger strike is defined by the World Medical Association as ‘a form of protest by people who lack other ways of making their demands known’ (WMA, 1991, p. 1) in which the refusal of food can pose serious risks to participants’ health or lives (Haselwarter et al., 2022). Two components are essential: fasting and stated political objectives (Sharma et al., 2020), to the extent that participants ‘may even prioritize a collective political goal over their own health’ (Haselwarter et al., 2022, p. 2). Hunger strikes can include individual or collective action and occur in custodial or public settings. They can also occur non-voluntarily and may also take place in the form of a partial fast – that is, do not necessarily constitute the total refusal of food (Irmak, 2015). While little ethical guidance on this specific issue is available in the field of communication, medical ethics literature provides some guidance, although this is also limited in nature (Gulati et al., 2019). Hunger strikes are usually short in duration and therefore ‘self resolving’ (Gulati et al., 2019; Sharma et al., 2020), though exceptions exist (ABC, 2010). As the purpose of a hunger strike is to garner attention as a means to effect political change, this guidance indicates that fasting or refusal of food in this context is not synonymous with self-harm or necessarily indicative of an eating disorder.

There has been a perceived rise in the use of hunger strikes as a form of non-violent political action in Australia and other advanced liberal democracies. In 2022, a UK man refused to eat for 37 days during his vigil outside parliament as he demanded action on the climate crisis (Horton & Gayle, 2022). In 2021, five people staged a hunger strike outside the White House in the US, to demand government action on climate to ‘match the severity of the crisis’ (Ramirez & Nilsen, 2021).

In Australia, in 2022 Rob Bakes held a hunger strike for climate justice outside Parliament House in Canberra (Mordd Richards, 2020). In 2019, climate activist Daniel Bleakley sat on Victorian Parliament steps as part of a 10-day action as part of Extinction Rebellion's Global Hunger Strikes (McPhee, 2019) while another protester, Dave McKay, went for 38 days (Fowler, 2019). Extension Rebellion said 500 activists globally had joined in the action. In 2009, Paul Connor held a hunger strike in Canberra in the lead-up to the global climate talks in Denmark (joined by two others: one in Barcelona and another in Copenhagen).

This method of protest is not just for those concerned about government inaction – hunger strikes are also used to protest against government decisions in support of environmental protections. A New South Wales farmer refused to eat after 52 days, over native vegetation laws which prevented him from clearing his land. He only stopped when his health declined to the point of hospitalisation (ABC, 2010).

In the 2021 US case, the hunger strike attracted mainstream media coverage during the action, while the UK case received coverage from the mainstream media when it was concluded (Ramirez & Nilsen, 2021). The Australian case was covered by mainstream outlets such as the Sydney Morning Herald, Canberra Times, ABC, SBS and Daily Telegraph.

It should be noted here that an even more extreme form of protest action, self-immolation, has been linked to climate action in the United States. On Earth Day in April 2022, photographer Wynn Bruce set himself on fire from the US Supreme Court to protest against the climate crisis. As a practising Buddhist, it was not clear if his action was inspired by monks and there was speculation about his religious beliefs in the press (Slevin & Bharath, 2022).

After his death, a climate scientist, Zen Buddhist priest and friend tweeted that the action was not suicide but ‘a deeply fearless act of compassion to bring attention to the climate crisis’ (Kritee, 2022).

A month after Wynn's death, a reporter for The New Republic in the US wrote an article, The Unfathomable Problem of Suicide as a Protest Tactic, which began by asking ‘Is self-immolation protest or pathology?’ (Cummins, 2022). In it, she wrote about the complex problem for editorial leaders.

As no advice was available in Australia for reporters faced with reporting upon hunger strikes (or self-immolation), those existing for reporting on suicide may serve as a guide. In Australia, many media outlets refer to coverage of suicide in various codes of practice, standards of practice and editorial policies (Skehan et al., 2020). Reporting guidelines for cases of suicide concentrate on two major concerns – contagion and stigma – which can hinder help-seeking behaviour and have negative impacts on vulnerable populations.

Contagion and stigma

The term ‘contagion’ refers to the influences on behaviour leading to suicide clusters or successive suicides in a specific social environment or location (Diefendorf et al., 2022) due to the belief that suicide can be socially transmitted (Walling, 2021). The phenomenon of contagion or ‘copycat’ suicide was first observed in both Europe and Japan in the eighteenth century:

The 1744 publication of Goethe's The Sorrows of Young Werther, a novel that ends in the protagonist's suicide, sparked a deadly trend among young men in Europe—the so-called ‘Werther effect’. Epidemiological research has subsequently borne this out: Across time and space, descriptions of suicide can lead to contagion. (Cummins, 2022)

Deaths of prominent people or celebrities associated with the phenomenon include those of Marilyn Monroe, Robin Williams and a ‘society osteopath’ associated with a British spy scandal in the 1960s. Young people and those with depression have been found to be most vulnerable (Walling, 2021). This vulnerability was demonstrated in an increase of almost 30% in children and young people aged 10–17 in the US after the fictional Netflix series ‘Thirteen Reasons Why’ aired in 2107 (Cole, 2019). Suicide contagion has previously been associated with media coverage, but due to young people's limited exposure to legacy or traditional media when compared with their social media consumption, there is some doubt about the level of this form of risk.

Copycat behaviour is also considered a risk in reporting bomb threats and other risks to public safety. NewsCorp editorial guidelines advise reporters not to report such incidents or details of devices unless requested by authorities, or when it is necessary to explain ‘public disruption’ that is caused by such threats. No advice on threats to public safety could be found in The Guardian or ABC editorial guidelines.

Among those affected by suicide are those facing bereavement. Their attempts to make sense of a death by suicide can be complicated by a feeling of stigma, stemming from historical views of the phenomenon influenced by religious and criminal perspectives. Those affected can experience a sense of disapproval in the form of both blame and shame arising from the circumstances of their loved one's death. This can be further complicated by self-stigmatisation, leading to distress and unhealthy coping strategies (Stallman, Hutchinson & Ohan, 2020).

In examining the contagion and stigma associated with suicide, changing the language used to describe the method and manner of death is recommended. For example, stigma ‘disappears when the narrative about deaths by suicide are comparable with other causes of death’ (Stallman, Hutchinson & Ohan p 7), while in contrast:

the more prominent the reporting of a suicide story, with recounting of the explicit and detailed facts regarding the method, the greater the increase in copycat suicides triggered in the younger population. (Walling, 2021, p. 106)

Therefore, guidelines on media reporting of suicide include using general terms to describe and specifically avoiding descriptions of the method and location of suicide and providing details on support available to those at risk. They also include advice to avoid glamorisation or sensationalising death in the case of celebrities.

Cognitive constriction

Psychologists consider the thinking around suicide as a form of cognitive constriction, where the participants are unable to perceive alternatives to the course of action they undertake:

Suicide, almost without exception, occurs as a result of an absence of alternative coping strategies. (Stallman, Hutchinson & Ohan, 2020)

This is demonstrated in criticism of coverage of the self-immolation of Wynne outside the US Supreme Court in Washington DC in 2022:

Haas and Lane's point—that everyone endures financial, emotional, and now climatic hardships but not everyone dies by suicide—is unimpeachably true. People do not die by suicide out of concerns over fossil fuels alone. (Cummins, 2022)

This view is supported by research which found that ‘media reports that provide information about methods of coping with adverse circumstances were associated with a decrease in suicides thereafter where that media reached a large audience’ (Walling, 2021). In Australia, this view is supported to the extent that these types of media reports are regarded as a form of suicide prevention (Skehan et al., 2020, p. 489; Australian Press Council, 2014).

Journalism decision-making

Decision-making in journalism is governed by the application of news values, or the method by which journalists determine the editorial value of a set of circumstances to cover, write and frame a news story. These values may be known by different names, but a core set of concepts involves:

1. Impact (also known as Consequence or Significance) 2. Conflict 3. Timeliness 4. Proximity 5. Prominence 6. Currency 7. Human interest 8. The unusual. (Conley & Lamble, 2006, p. 83)

The issues arising from a news story are further considered through the prism of journalism ethics. In Australia, the journalists’ union (now called the Media Entertainment and Arts Alliance) created a set of ethical principles which members are expected to uphold. This code and its principles owe their origins to social responsibility theory (Richards, 2005), which considers that journalists have a responsibility to provide comprehensive and thorough coverage of news, both reflecting and shaping the values of a society and various groups within it. This responsibility also includes providing readers with appropriate context to allow them to better understand events that affect them. Significantly, if there is a conflict between ethical considerations and news imperatives, under this theory the emphasis will always fall on responsibility over privilege. In practice, this theory includes core concepts of honesty, fairness, independence, and respect for the rights of others (MEAA, 2024). This framework has also been extended to include guidelines on reporting on hate speech and extremism, as well as LGBTQIA+ issues.

In its preamble to the code, the MEAA says ‘respect for truth and the public's right to information are fundamental principles of journalism’ and journalists should be both responsible and accountable to their communities and/or readers. A further consideration is the principle of harm minimisation, which is common to both medical and journalistic ethics (Muller, 2014). Similarly, an ethical conflict can occur in both professions, when balancing this principle against other competing needs. Muller (2014) connects the philosophical tradition of thought known as Virtue to the MEAA Code of Ethics clause of Responsibility, describing this concept as:

taking pains to imagine and assess the possible risks to life, human well-being, property, and reputation, as well as to a particular public interest… (Muller, 2014, p. 30)

However, this requires balancing the good of the individual against the good of society. In this case, the individual involved is the person(s) taking part in the hunger strike, while the public at large is synonymous with the journalist's audience or readership. In the context of suicide reporting, the Australian Press Council defines ‘public interest’ as a matter of:

substantial and widespread significance, not merely something in which many people may be interested. (Australian Press Council, 2014)

The Code of Ethics itself provides a clue that some clauses may exist in tension with others:

Only substantial advancement of the public interest or risk of substantial harm to people allows any standard to be overridden. (MEAA, 2024)

In this context, the concept of public interest can be considered in terms of the attendant news values of the particular story. For example, a political protest involving climate change where protestors glue their hands to a road or other infrastructure might attract a great deal of news coverage due to the strength of the news value of Significance or Impact (that is, upon readers and therefore the public at large). In contrast, a protest for the same reasons by the same group involving a hunger strike might receive comparatively little coverage, as the risk of substantial harm to the protestor may outweigh the public interest involved. It is likely that on this basis, journalists may be reluctant to cover individual hunger strikes, on the basis of their potential risk of substantial harm to the individual concerned. However, Irmak (2015) argues that due to the short-lived nature of this form of protest, fatalities from hunger strikes are rare (p250); however, it can lead to other harms, including medical issues that require treatment in hospital.

Furthermore, Irmak (2015) refutes the belief that hunger strikes ought to be considered as a form of potential suicide. He contends this is a different behaviour to food refusal as a form of attempted or actual suicide (p251), arguing that while it forms a potential consequence, the intent of a protestor is political, not self-harming in nature. Finally, Cummins (2022) describes the challenge facing journalists worldwide when faced with stories involving matters of actual or potential self-harm as a form of protest:

…to interrogate suffering without furthering it. To discuss but not sanction. To listen, without compromising on our shared belief in the value of life. (Cummins, 2022)

Guides and editorial codes

There are no easily found style guides or editorial codes for media makers seeking guidance about what to do when confronted by a hunger strike for political purposes. Editorial codes and style guides found online did not list hunger strikes as a subject heading, with editorial leaders appearing to put them into the same category as bomb scares, i.e. that while being aware of the event, coverage was not provided for fear of encouraging others.

The editorial policies published by the Australian national public broadcaster ABC on suicide and self-harm also note a ‘complex’ relationship between these two issues. The advice points out that while acts of self-harm may be separate from suicidal behaviour, they hold the risk of copycat behaviour in common. This advice makes specific mention of the protest involving acts of self-harm by children in the Woomera Detention Centre in 2002 and includes advice to avoid ‘dangerous imitation’. It points back to the Mindframe guidelines; however, it also discusses the dilemma of newsworthiness.

As a newsworthy event, we cover it when other elements of the story are sufficiently newsworthy to justify coverage… If a particular suicide has other newsworthy aspects to it such as major disruption to the broader community or a highly visible event that caused broader impact and trauma, we would report it on that basis. (Suicide and self-harm, 2012)

The ABC policy on Harm and Offence refers in general terms to content which ‘may lead to dangerous imitation or exacerbate serious threats to individual or public health’ (Harm and Offence, 2011) and advises taking care to mitigate particularly through careful expression of the issue. The Australian newspaper, part of the NewsCorp stable, also has no advice on covering hunger strikes, but does give advice on reporting suicides and warns journalists not to trivialise them.

20.1 Do not reveal graphic details of a suspected suicide or graphic details of the method and location of a suicide unless the public interest in doing so clearly outweighs the risk, if any, of causing further suicides. Always consult your editor or relevant editorial executive.

20.2 Avoid making judgements about the method of death which suggest suicide is an acceptable means of resolving problems, particularly among young people.

20.3 Do not sensationalise, glamorise or trivialise suicides. Adopt sensitivity and moderation in news gathering and in any contact with those who might be affected.

20.4 Where possible, include in such reports the contact number of support groups where people may seek help.

The Guardian newspaper, which is committed to covering climate action, does not discuss hunger strikes, but does have clear guidance on suicides and euthanasia, including the inclusion of help-seeking advice.

Journalists should exercise particular care in reporting suicide or issues involving suicide, bearing in mind the risk of encouraging others. This applies to presentation, including the use of pictures, and to describing the method of suicide. Any substances should be referred to in general rather than specific terms. When appropriate, a helpline number (e.g., Samaritans) should be given. The feelings of relatives should also be carefully considered. (Guardian and Observer style guide: S)

It also provides guidance that the phrase ‘climate change’ is no longer considered enough to accurately reflect the seriousness of the problem and urges the use of the words ‘climate emergency’ or ‘climate crisis’. The Guardian guidelines also provide the Oxford English Dictionary definition of a climate science denier (Guardian and Observer style guide: C). While it does include a listing for protests, The Guardian's editorial advice is restricted to the correct use of prepositions in reporting these only.

The government-funded mental health organisation, Everymind, which provides research-backed advice for reporters on mental health issues and suicide, does not have explicit guidance on hunger strikes. While Mindframe has conducted evidence reviews looking at suicides with other contexts (e.g., murder, terrorism, political protest) hunger strikes were not covered in these. Furthermore, Mindframe has uncovered no research suggesting specific harms from reporting on hunger strikes (although the absence of evidence does not equate to the absence of harm). A hunger strike may be considered a form of self-harm in the sense that it forms a consequence of the action, but the motivation for a hunger strike differs from self-harm significantly. Self-harm is usually a coping mechanism to manage difficult emotions or distress (Woodley et al., 2021), that is, directed inwards towards the self, whereas climate activists could be experiencing extreme distress and direct their behaviour outward, through extreme actions such as hunger strikes.

Without explicit guidelines available in Australia, some news organisations were clearly conflicted about how to report this hunger strike, even after it ended. In a 6 December podcast, the Wardrobe Crisis provided a content warning:

While in this Episode, we talk about creativity and hope, baking and Strictly Ballroom, and address a wide range of things from the politics of climate action to biodiversity, we also discuss the details of going on a hunger strike. Personally, I would say that bit is not suitable for children, although I suspect Gregory would disagree. I'd also like to let you know there's mention of eating disorders in this interview. It's a compelling listen - there's much to think about and learn from here, and I admire Gregory's stand and his ethics. But do exercise your own judgement with little or vulnerable/ anxious ears around. Thank you, Clare xxx. (Press, 2023)

This warning erroneously appears to conflate the refusal of food or fasting as a form of political protest with the eating disorder anorexia nervosa.

In the absence of formal in-house or research-backed guidance, Australian journalists or content makers seeking answers are likely to use Google for information. A Google search for hunger strike reporting in Australia in January 2024 found the first response came from the Tasmanian Government's prison service.

The service defined a hunger strike as:

a prolonged refusal to eat or drink carried out as a protest by a prisoner. A prisoner is considered to have commenced a hunger strike if he / she has not eaten three consecutively supplied meals and has indicated (either verbally or non-verbally) their intention to further refuse to eat.

There was no advice in the Tasmanian prison document about media reporting of a strike, but also there is no suggestion that the prisoner be removed from others. In fact, the document suggests the reverse: ‘access to programs, education and visits will still be granted if deemed appropriate by CPHS and the TPS’. Although it does go on to say that:

Decisions regarding the accommodation and services provided to the prisoner must be made following consultation between the relevant Superintendent and the Medical Officer.

And:

the prisoner must not be permitted to engage in any intensive physical activity, if advice received from CPHS indicates that it may be detrimental to the prisoner's health when coupled with a refusal to eat.

Similar rules were found for the NSW Department of Communities and Justice.

These prison services agreed that a hunger strike exists if a person had missed three consecutive meals and had an intention to refuse further food and/or fluid. The NSW guidelines made clear the need for the correctional centre psychologist to visit the inmate to:

assess the inmate's mental state and refer to a psychiatrist where necessary, or to offer assessment and/or counselling where appropriate. (Hunger strikes, 2017)

It is also clear in both the NSW and Tasmanian prison systems that a hunger strike is considered a mental health issue, or at least a matter of mental health concern. The prison service further required a psychologist's report on the inmate's mental state and details about the inmate's relationship with officers and other inmates. It is also worth noting that the prison setting could be considered different to a public protest setting, as a person in prison is likely hunger striking to get their own needs met, potentially as a form of asking for help, rather than political activism.

The Australian Human Rights Commission also has guidelines on hunger strikes and noted concerns about the poor management of children taking such action after events in 2002 involving unaccompanied children in a detention centre (Australian Human Rights Commission, 2010).

Other hits from a Google search include a document from the International Committee of the Red Cross in 1998 on Medical and Ethical Aspects of Hunger Strikes in Custody and the Issue of Torture, which notes the primary purpose of protests using hunger strikes is to shame others into action (Reyes, 1998). Another opinion piece from The Washington Post in 1994 discusses the tactics of hunger strikers who fast to force political change, noting:

Reconciliation was the goal, not victory. (McCarthy, 1994)

The academic literature, news values and other guidelines tell us that that hunger strikes may be worthy of coverage in the mainstream media, and due to the intention of participants in gaining attention to a particular cause, in the Australian context may be considered as political in nature. However, due to the extreme risk of harm participants undertake in refusing food, guidelines developed for reporting suicide may be helpful in these cases; specifically, those which emphasise reporting the context (i.e. the issue that led to protest) rather than the detail of the method of protest.

Conclusion

Using the case study of a high-profile hunger strike in Australia's national capital from 2023, and a review of the academic and grey literature, this study set out to answer three questions: Should hunger strikes be treated by the media in the same way as suicide or as a political protest action? Will providing media coverage of a hunger strike encourage others to follow suit? And, if the media decides to cover a hunger strike, what (if any) mitigating factors could be used?

We found there is justification for mainstream coverage of climate action involving hunger strikes based on the political motivation of participants, which is distinguished from the behaviour associated with attempted suicide. In deciding whether the issue was ethical to cover before it was resolved (in other words, not waiting until it was over), the concept of the social responsibility of the media puts greater weight on ethical considerations in the context of journalism practice. The political action of the hunger strikers fits neatly within this model, which means they are ethical stories to cover as they arise. Journalists do not need to wait until a hunger strike has been resolved before it is ethical and newsworthy to cover. Therefore, it is more useful to consider the action as a protest action and refer to editorial guidelines that cover that kind of action.

However, due to a risk of copycat behaviour with hunger strikers because of climate anxiety (particularly in young people), as part of the ethical emphasis on responsibility, we, therefore, recommend that newsroom leaders exercise caution in what they do publish due to the risk of contagion or imitation, like the caution used in stories on threats to public safety, suicide, and self-harm (including self-immolation). Such caution should be exercised by mainstream media, even though we acknowledge social media platforms may be awash with explicit images and text of the same issue or event. Although there may be strong justification for reporting such events as they happen due to public disruption or other factors involving the public interest, similar advice on reporting suicide and threats to public safety should be followed. These specifically include emphasis on reporting the context of the political issue (i.e. the issue that led to the protest) rather than unnecessary detail of the method of protest itself.

If the media does cover a climate action hunger strike, there could be value in publishing mental help health phonelines, due to the risk of climate anxiety. Consideration could be given by climate-supporting publications such as The Guardian to also publish a list of actions that individuals could take towards climate action, which do not involve a potential loss of life or permanent damage to the body. We do note that mental health lines have been included in Guardian stories discussing the anxiety of teenagers around climate emergency.