RainAndSadness
Administrator
- Jun 12, 2018
- 2,149
So there has been a new BBC report about SN. Angus Crawford went to Ukraine to confront someone who sells SN legally to their customers. It's the same reporter who confronted the founders and called us pro-suicide in several articles. [1] [2][3][4]
In that article, they do two things. They confirm that "the poison" source has a high purity. They also tell their viewers where to find that poison - in Ukraine. Very important details. So I did a little test to investigate if someone who isn't a member of this forum and has absolutely no idea which source that article is referring to, could find out alone on that report where to buy SN.
So what did I find out? Well. First of all, they mention in that report that Kenneth Law has been arrested for selling the same poison. Okay, let's start there. I do a quick Google search for his name and I found out very quickly what's the name of the substance that he sold to people, thanks to this article here.
Okay. Now I have a name of the substance. If I search the name of the substance in Google with the location of that seller that's been mentioned and confronted in the BBC article, I can find the source. It's the fifth result in Google if you include the ad.
If you use the chemical formula to search for the substance, it's the fourth result in Google, again, including the ad.
I'm not telling you where to buy that substance, that's not the point of this thread and I have censored the name of the substance for that reason. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy here. This journalist has accused us of promoting that substance, which isn't true by the way, but you just wrote an article where you tell us where to find SN basically, like your article was the missing piece to the puzzle and anyone who is suicidal and not a member of Sanctioned Suicide will be able to find the source now that ships to the UK if they apply some deductive skills. No article, not even Tantacrul, has done that so far. You also confirmed a high purity substance with an actual lab. That's very helpful for people who didn't know before if the substance was actually potent enough to serve it's purpose. So you exposed non-SaSu members to a potentially lethal and effective way to kill yourself. And I'm sure all the suicidal people out there will appreciate that you did all the investigative work for them.
I mean, what's even the point of this BBC report? Does it bring us any new valuable information, anything important or helpful, which is kinda important if you do journalism? No, all he does is harassing someone from Ukraine. Oh, and of course, that article also tells us that regulating the substance doesn't work because people can still obtain it from other sources in other countries.. So again, that brings us back to the question if regulating the substance in your country even serves any suicide-preventing purpose or is it simply an easy way to score some political points without actually addressing the reasons why people commit suicide in the first place? The BBC is still focusing too much energy and time on the symptoms of suicide ideation when they should look into the causes of suicide ideation, as I've pointed out in previous thread l. And where could you possibly find out about the reasons why people want to commit suicide? Oh yeah, in this forum, by reading all these posts here, which you didn't do because we're all just pro-suicide here, right.... Again, this forum would be a very useful resource to improve people's lives and prevent suicide if you took us and the people who used it seriously but it's of course easier for Angus Crawford to fly to Ukraine and talk to some random person, instead of holding their own goverment accountable, which doesn't care for its own people. Maybe, that's the problem? Just a guess... But that's how much he cares about suicide, doing useless journalism which doesn't benefit anyone. It's really funny though, they fly to Ukraine to confront someone who abides by local rules, they tell us where to buy his product while doing so, for an audience that's in the UK and therefore has no legislative power in Ukraine to regulate the substance and therefore prevent further sales but instead all the people who had a difficult time finding a source for SN in the UK know where to get it now. Was that the plan? Yikes. This is simply neglecting journalistic standards in exchange for your five minutes of fame and a fancy headline. That's pretty much it and I'm not the only person saying that.
Here is a scientic article outlining the exact same issue and calling out the media for irresponsible reporting when it comes to Kenneth Law and his products.
What are they saying?
Just some important snippets. The article goes on and I recommend reading it to understand why the coverage is problematic from an anti-choice suicide-prevention perspective, which I obviously disagree with but the hypocrisy among all people who have reported on this forum and the substance still exists. These reporters aren't even following their own moral compass. I think the last sentence is especially damning as it clearly highlights that they don't really care about suicide prevention if it conflicts with the potential to produce some nice headlines. I think the bigger picture here is that these journalists are hypocrites. They will point the finger at us and claim we're promoting a substances and pretend a rise in the use of that substance for end-to-life purposes is our fault but is that even true? There is no evidence for that. This forum is relatively unknown and that also applies to the method. I have highlighted in the past that these SN suicides are pretty rare compared to other methods that are used every single day. See these articles here where I have debunked the so-called "concerning suicide trend" around SN.
The amounts of suicide that happen with SN and the constant reporting on SN are out of proportion. And the article I've linked above also mentions that Google trends and the popularity of the substance directly correlates with the reporting.
And trust me, when the entire media apparatus blasts a substance for months non-stop, even mentioning it's name, that has much more of an impact on actual suicide numbers than our forum. And the media didn't just bring SN to the mainstream, they also brought us into the mainstream. We are a niche forum and we used to be relatively unknown until the NYT put us on the frontpage and until Tantacrul made a video about us that's at almost 5.4 million views, which is the reason why there is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to this forum now. Let's not forget that we have been under constant exposure since 2021. That has increased the reach of this forum, it has increased our registration numbers and it has boosted our membership count to 45k and it has increased the amount of people who have access to ressouces now that helps them make decisions. That wouldn't have happened without the relentless reporting and let's not forget that the NYT actually named this forum, which made it super easy for people to find us and that also contradicts with the journalistic guidelines that's been laid out in this article. The way how our forum has been covered have been constant violations of those ethical guidelines. That's a fact. The NYT has been criticised from mental health experts for blasting this forum. I hate to say it, but if you advertise the forbidden fruit - and that's how they have portrayed this forum for years - that isn't going to scare people away. It will make them come to us - voluntarily, because there is a need for a website like ours. That's another fact. There are people out there who are done being told what they can and can't do with their own lives and in this forum, we have a different approach to this subject. I have said it in 2021 and I will say it again.
So what's my take away on this? They're making it worse, as ususal. They made it worse when they exposed our forum to the public, which was supposed to be a niche forum, only to be found if you specifically searched for it. And the exact same thing applies to the coverage on SN. If you blast that substance in the media 24/7, you don't need to be surprised if a lot more people will use it to exercise their right to die but you certainly don't get to blame us for any alleged trends when you give that substance so much attention. And flying from the UK to Ukraine and confronting some random person instead of holding your own goverment accountable for not actually improving people's lives is peak irony. I can't wait for the next ground-breaking report from the BBC when Angus Crawford flies down to Africa to find another poor person minding his own business he can hold responsible for why people in the UK commit suicide...
That will definitely address the real problems of people living in the UK and definitely improve the lives of so many suicidal people. I'm sure they will be so grateful for all the funds going into these visits in the US and Europe for these totally valuable and newsworthy 10 second interviews...
In that article, they do two things. They confirm that "the poison" source has a high purity. They also tell their viewers where to find that poison - in Ukraine. Very important details. So I did a little test to investigate if someone who isn't a member of this forum and has absolutely no idea which source that article is referring to, could find out alone on that report where to buy SN.
So what did I find out? Well. First of all, they mention in that report that Kenneth Law has been arrested for selling the same poison. Okay, let's start there. I do a quick Google search for his name and I found out very quickly what's the name of the substance that he sold to people, thanks to this article here.
Okay. Now I have a name of the substance. If I search the name of the substance in Google with the location of that seller that's been mentioned and confronted in the BBC article, I can find the source. It's the fifth result in Google if you include the ad.
If you use the chemical formula to search for the substance, it's the fourth result in Google, again, including the ad.
I'm not telling you where to buy that substance, that's not the point of this thread and I have censored the name of the substance for that reason. I'm pointing out the hypocrisy here. This journalist has accused us of promoting that substance, which isn't true by the way, but you just wrote an article where you tell us where to find SN basically, like your article was the missing piece to the puzzle and anyone who is suicidal and not a member of Sanctioned Suicide will be able to find the source now that ships to the UK if they apply some deductive skills. No article, not even Tantacrul, has done that so far. You also confirmed a high purity substance with an actual lab. That's very helpful for people who didn't know before if the substance was actually potent enough to serve it's purpose. So you exposed non-SaSu members to a potentially lethal and effective way to kill yourself. And I'm sure all the suicidal people out there will appreciate that you did all the investigative work for them.
I mean, what's even the point of this BBC report? Does it bring us any new valuable information, anything important or helpful, which is kinda important if you do journalism? No, all he does is harassing someone from Ukraine. Oh, and of course, that article also tells us that regulating the substance doesn't work because people can still obtain it from other sources in other countries.. So again, that brings us back to the question if regulating the substance in your country even serves any suicide-preventing purpose or is it simply an easy way to score some political points without actually addressing the reasons why people commit suicide in the first place? The BBC is still focusing too much energy and time on the symptoms of suicide ideation when they should look into the causes of suicide ideation, as I've pointed out in previous thread l. And where could you possibly find out about the reasons why people want to commit suicide? Oh yeah, in this forum, by reading all these posts here, which you didn't do because we're all just pro-suicide here, right.... Again, this forum would be a very useful resource to improve people's lives and prevent suicide if you took us and the people who used it seriously but it's of course easier for Angus Crawford to fly to Ukraine and talk to some random person, instead of holding their own goverment accountable, which doesn't care for its own people. Maybe, that's the problem? Just a guess... But that's how much he cares about suicide, doing useless journalism which doesn't benefit anyone. It's really funny though, they fly to Ukraine to confront someone who abides by local rules, they tell us where to buy his product while doing so, for an audience that's in the UK and therefore has no legislative power in Ukraine to regulate the substance and therefore prevent further sales but instead all the people who had a difficult time finding a source for SN in the UK know where to get it now. Was that the plan? Yikes. This is simply neglecting journalistic standards in exchange for your five minutes of fame and a fancy headline. That's pretty much it and I'm not the only person saying that.
Here is a scientic article outlining the exact same issue and calling out the media for irresponsible reporting when it comes to Kenneth Law and his products.
The Kenneth Law Media Event – A Dangerous Natural Experiment
econtent.hogrefe.com
What are they saying?
Just some important snippets. The article goes on and I recommend reading it to understand why the coverage is problematic from an anti-choice suicide-prevention perspective, which I obviously disagree with but the hypocrisy among all people who have reported on this forum and the substance still exists. These reporters aren't even following their own moral compass. I think the last sentence is especially damning as it clearly highlights that they don't really care about suicide prevention if it conflicts with the potential to produce some nice headlines. I think the bigger picture here is that these journalists are hypocrites. They will point the finger at us and claim we're promoting a substances and pretend a rise in the use of that substance for end-to-life purposes is our fault but is that even true? There is no evidence for that. This forum is relatively unknown and that also applies to the method. I have highlighted in the past that these SN suicides are pretty rare compared to other methods that are used every single day. See these articles here where I have debunked the so-called "concerning suicide trend" around SN.
Debunking the SN hysteria.
The media found another topic to talk about. They have once again covered SN, raising the alarm about a "disturbing trend". There have also been some scientific papers[1][2] reporting about SN suicides. I'm not gonna address the reason why SN is appealing as a suicide method in this thread...
sanctioned-suicide.net
The SN hysteria continues in 2024.
As you know I'm trying to debunk the hysteria surrounding SN and just recently I stumbled upon an interesting article again. So, according to this article, Colorado is trying to ban the sale of concentrated SN. Okay. That state has a population of 5.8 million. What drastic numbers of people...
sanctioned-suicide.net
The amounts of suicide that happen with SN and the constant reporting on SN are out of proportion. And the article I've linked above also mentions that Google trends and the popularity of the substance directly correlates with the reporting.
And trust me, when the entire media apparatus blasts a substance for months non-stop, even mentioning it's name, that has much more of an impact on actual suicide numbers than our forum. And the media didn't just bring SN to the mainstream, they also brought us into the mainstream. We are a niche forum and we used to be relatively unknown until the NYT put us on the frontpage and until Tantacrul made a video about us that's at almost 5.4 million views, which is the reason why there is an entire Wikipedia page dedicated to this forum now. Let's not forget that we have been under constant exposure since 2021. That has increased the reach of this forum, it has increased our registration numbers and it has boosted our membership count to 45k and it has increased the amount of people who have access to ressouces now that helps them make decisions. That wouldn't have happened without the relentless reporting and let's not forget that the NYT actually named this forum, which made it super easy for people to find us and that also contradicts with the journalistic guidelines that's been laid out in this article. The way how our forum has been covered have been constant violations of those ethical guidelines. That's a fact. The NYT has been criticised from mental health experts for blasting this forum. I hate to say it, but if you advertise the forbidden fruit - and that's how they have portrayed this forum for years - that isn't going to scare people away. It will make them come to us - voluntarily, because there is a need for a website like ours. That's another fact. There are people out there who are done being told what they can and can't do with their own lives and in this forum, we have a different approach to this subject. I have said it in 2021 and I will say it again.
Every time you mention that there is a place out there, in the distant corners of the internet, that allows people to talk about deeply personal struggles without censorship and the moralising undertone, a platform that recognises individual autonomy and the right to decide what happens with your own life (which you essentially treat like the forbidden fruit of the 21th century by the way) you will increase the member count of this forum - deal with it.
So what's my take away on this? They're making it worse, as ususal. They made it worse when they exposed our forum to the public, which was supposed to be a niche forum, only to be found if you specifically searched for it. And the exact same thing applies to the coverage on SN. If you blast that substance in the media 24/7, you don't need to be surprised if a lot more people will use it to exercise their right to die but you certainly don't get to blame us for any alleged trends when you give that substance so much attention. And flying from the UK to Ukraine and confronting some random person instead of holding your own goverment accountable for not actually improving people's lives is peak irony. I can't wait for the next ground-breaking report from the BBC when Angus Crawford flies down to Africa to find another poor person minding his own business he can hold responsible for why people in the UK commit suicide...
That will definitely address the real problems of people living in the UK and definitely improve the lives of so many suicidal people. I'm sure they will be so grateful for all the funds going into these visits in the US and Europe for these totally valuable and newsworthy 10 second interviews...
Last edited: