Study Suggests Trigger Warnings May Backfire, Increasing Engagement with Disturbing Content
New research indicates that trigger warnings-intended to shield audiences from perhaps upsetting material-may inadvertently pique curiosity and encourage viewership of graphic content. While designed to allow individuals to prepare emotionally, laboratory studies and real-world observation reveal a consistent response of intrigue, rather than avoidance.
The findings challenge the widespread adoption of trigger warnings across media platforms, raising questions about their effectiveness and potential unintended consequences. Experts suggest the warnings, often vaguely worded, function more as enticements than deterrents. This dynamic shifts responsibility from content providers to consumers, allowing organizations to share disturbing material while appearing to offer a disclaimer.
According to the research, the utility of sharing graphic content, such as beheading videos, lies in generating clicks, not necessarily raising awareness. “What’s the utility of sharing a beheading video,for instance? Its not going to raise awareness more than telling people a beheading happen,but it’ll get clicks,” one researcher stated. “So they put a warning on it, to be like, ‘We warned you, if you’re going to watch the graphic content and be disturbed by it, that’s on you.’ But they’re going to show you this graphic stuff becuase they know it’s going to get clicks.”
The study highlights a growing concern that trigger warnings are increasingly used to absolve media organizations of responsibility for the impact of their content. Instead of proactively mitigating harm, the warnings serve to “put the onus back on the consumer,” researchers found. This trend has implications for news outlets, streaming services, and social media platforms grappling with the ethical considerations of distributing potentially traumatizing material.
