Trigger Warnings Must be More Explicit
Every time I feel good, I think it'll last forever. But then they forget a trigger warning
This article mentions topics of suicide, sexual and physical assault, drug abuse and addiction
It’s kind of sad that I will know more about what is going to happen in a “Euphoria” episode from Angus Cloud’s Twitter feed compared to the show’s own content advisory warnings.
“Euphoria” is a cultural phenomenon — an incredibly popular television series that portrays minors in socially sensitive situations. The show is quite literally all the rage, but it falls short when it comes to being accessible and respectful to audiences that are triggered by its themes and plot lines.
“The following episode contains violence, nudity and sexual content that may be disturbing to viewers. Viewer discretion is advised.”
How about the rest of it, “Euphoria”? Topics of suicide, drug abuse, addiction and the types of assault would have been nice to know about before watching the episode last Sunday. I, and many who have been watching this past season, am left speechless when yet another graphic representation or reference to a triggering topic appears without warning on the screen.
“Euphoria” isn’t the only show with a glaring disparity between content and content warning. Many other films and television series discuss and include triggering content and are unclear about the extent of these warnings at the beginning of their episode.
There’s two parts to a trigger warning: saying it, and then respecting it.
Eschewing a warning perpetuates the idea that some issues aren’t worthy of advance notice. Even if this wasn’t the intent of the producers of the show, it is how it comes across. If a trigger warning doesn’t actually allow people to prepare themselves for what they are about to see, then what’s the point of having it in the first place?
Trigger warnings are quite common now, but when they are done incorrectly, the benefit is negated. For example, quickly saying “trigger warning” and then immediately proceeding to describe situations of suicide, sexual assault or drug abuse will not help anyone.
The intended effect of a trigger warning is nullified when one doesn’t have the space to process what they are about to view — it becomes meaningless words on a screen.
It’s bleak, sure, but it's true in the sense that having a less than desirable trigger warning at the beginning of a show is as ineffective as not having one at all.
Including a trigger warning should not be treated as a task on a checklist to complete when creating a film, television show or another form of media. This implicitly invalidates the tremendously sensitive topics that many people struggle with because it is not conveyed with care.
Not all films and shows are legally obligated to be rated in terms of G, PG, PG-13, R etc. Instead, films are rated for the benefit of the audience to respect ethical standards of maturity. Content advisory warnings should be followed with a similar protocol of standardization.
If the television and film industries are able to have a guide on what to specifically include in trigger warnings and to what extent they should be described, viewing wouldn’t be such a stressful experience.
Needless to say, I am rooting for “Euphoria” this Sunday night and not the Bengals. I hope the show’s lack of warning doesn’t cause me to switch the channel to men butting heads when I could be watching some Lexi and Fez screen time instead.