Media paper: news coverage of depression and suicide
Find a news story from the past six to twelve months on depressive disorders, bipolar disorder, suicide or self-injury, then compare it against the article supplied with the assignment, following the media paper guidelines.
Editorial process
Last reviewed · August 13, 2026
Two articles, one comparison
The instruction is short and two of its constraints do most of the marking. The first is recency: the story you choose should be from the past six months, and a year is the outside limit, so a widely cited feature from three years ago fails the brief however good it is. The second is that the comparison is fixed on one side. One article is provided for you and covers depressive disorders, bipolar disorder, suicide and self-injury; your job is to find a second that relates to it and then set the two beside each other. That word relates is doing real work. A story about anxiety or about funding does not relate closely enough to sustain a comparison, because you end up describing two subjects rather than comparing two treatments of one. Choose a story that lands squarely on one of the four topics the provided article covers, so every paragraph can hold both articles at once.
What a media paper actually assesses is the gap between how a disorder is understood clinically and how it reaches the public through reporting. So the comparison should not stop at whether both articles are accurate. Ask what each one leaves out, whose voice it centres, whether it explains a diagnosis or merely names it, and whether its language reproduces the framing that clinicians and journalism guidelines have specifically warned against. Suicide reporting is the sharpest case: established media guidelines discourage describing method and location, discourage presenting a death as inexplicable or as a response to a single cause, and encourage including help-seeking information. Those are checkable features of a text, which makes them far better evidence than an impression that an article felt sensational. Read the media paper guidelines document before drafting, because it will name the specific dimensions your instructor expects the comparison to run along.
Likely learning objectives
Inferred from the brief — check these against your own rubric.
- 01Select a current news article that relates closely to a supplied article on mood disorders.
- 02Compare two treatments of one topic rather than summarising two topics.
- 03Identify framing, omission and source selection as features of media coverage.
- 04Apply recognised suicide and mental-health reporting standards as evaluative criteria.
- 05Distinguish clinical description of a disorder from its public representation.
Read the full question
Review every instruction before using the planning guidance that follows.
Course-wide instructions that accompany this question
You must proofread your paper. But do not strictly rely on your computer’s spell-checker and grammar-checker; failure to do so indicates a lack of effort on your part and you can expect your grade to suffer accordingly. Papers with numerous misspelled words and grammatical mistakes will be penalized. Read over your paper – in silence and then aloud – before handing it in and make corrections as necessary. Often it is advantageous to have a friend proofread your paper for obvious errors. Handwritten corrections are preferable to uncorrected mistakes. Depressive Disorders Discussion Use a standard 10 to 12 point (10 to 12 characters per inch) typeface. Smaller or compressed type and papers with small margins or single-spacing are hard to read. It is better to let your essay run over the recommended number of pages than to try to compress it into fewer pages. Likewise, large type, large margins, large indentations, triple-spacing, increased leading (space between lines), increased kerning (space between letters), and any other such attempts at “padding” to increase the length of a paper are unacceptable, wasteful of trees, and will not fool your professor. The paper must be neatly formatted, double-spaced with a one-inch margin on the top, bottom, and sides of each page. When submitting hard copy, be sure to use white paper and print out using dark ink. If it is hard to read your essay, it will also be hard to follow your argument. ADDITIONAL INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CLASS Discussion Questions (DQ) Initial responses to the DQ should address all components of the questions asked, include a minimum of one scholarly source, and be at least 250 words. Successful responses are substantive (i.e., add something new to the discussion, engage others in the discussion, well-developed idea) and include at least one scholarly source. One or two sentence responses, simple statements of agreement or “good post,” and responses that are off-topic will not count as substantive. Substantive responses should be at least 150 words. I encourage you to incorporate the readings from the week (as applicable) into your responses. Weekly Participation Your initial responses to the mandatory DQ do not count toward participation and are graded separately. In addition to the DQ responses, you must post at least one reply to peers (or me) on three separate days, for a total of three replies. Participation posts do not require a scholarly source/citation (unless you cite someone else’s work). Part of your weekly participation includes viewing the weekly announcement and attesting to watching it in the comments. These announcements are made to ensure you understand everything that is due during the week. APA Format and Writing Quality Familiarize yourself with APA format and practice using it correctly. It is used for most writing assignments for your degree. Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for APA paper templates, citation examples, tips, etc. Points will be deducted for poor use of APA format or absence of APA format (if required). Cite all sources of information! When in doubt, cite the source. Paraphrasing also requires a citation. I highly recommend using the APA Publication Manual, 6th edition. Use of Direct Quotes I discourage overutilization of direct quotes in DQs and assignments at the Masters’ level and deduct points accordingly. As Masters’ level students, it is important that you be able to critically analyze and interpret information from journal articles and other resources. Simply restating someone else’s words does not demonstrate an understanding of the content or critical analysis of the content. It is best to paraphrase content and cite your source. LopesWrite Policy For assignments that need to be submitted to LopesWrite, please be sure you have received your report and Similarity Index (SI) percentage BEFORE you do a “final submit” to me. Once you have received your report, please review it. This report will show you grammatical, punctuation, and spelling errors that can easily be fixed. Take the extra few minutes to review instead of getting counted off for these mistakes. Review your similarities. Did you forget to cite something? Did you not paraphrase well enough? Is your paper made up of someone else’s thoughts more than your own? Visit the Writing Center in the Student Success Center, under the Resources tab in LoudCloud for tips on improving your paper and SI score. Late Policy The university’s policy on late assignments is 10% penalty PER DAY LATE. This also applies to late DQ replies. Please communicate with me if you anticipate having to submit an assignment late. I am happy to be flexible, with advance notice. We may be able to work out an extension based on extenuating circumstances. If you do not communicate with me before submitting an assignment late, the GCU late policy will be in effect. I do not accept assignments that are two or more weeks late unless we have worked out an extension. As per policy, no assignments are accepted after the last day of class. Any assignment submitted after midnight on the last day of class will not be accepted for grading. Communication Communication is so very important. There are multiple ways to communicate with me: Questions to Instructor Forum: This is a great place to ask course content or assignment questions. If you have a question, there is a good chance one of your peers does as well. This is a public forum for the class. Individual Forum: This is a private forum to ask me questions or send me messages. This will be checked at least once every 24 hours. Depressive Disorders Discussion
Turn the brief into deliverables
- 01One news article from within the past six to twelve months, cited in full.
- 02A summary of the supplied article and of the article you located.
- 03A comparison organised by dimension rather than one article after the other.
- 04An assessment of each article against recognised reporting standards.
- 05Whatever format, length and citation style the media paper guidelines document specifies.
Summarise, compare, then judge the coverage
The two articles and why they pair
Identify both texts and state the shared topic that makes a comparison possible.
What each article claims about the disorder
Summarise the substantive content of both, separating reported fact from framing.
Comparison by dimension
Run the two articles against each other on sourcing, framing, omission and language.
Measured against reporting standards
Apply recognised suicide and mental-illness reporting guidance as explicit criteria.
What the coverage does to public understanding
Draw the conclusion the comparison supports about representation of these disorders.
Reporting guidelines, not opinion pieces
Recommended databases
- National Institute of Mental Health
- MedlinePlus
- StatPearls via NCBI Bookshelf
- A major news database or newspaper archive
- The supplied media paper guidelines
Search sequence
- 1.Read the supplied article closely and list the specific claims it makes about the disorder.
- 2.Search a news archive restricted to the past six months on the same disorder.
- 3.Check a clinical reference for how the disorder is actually characterised and diagnosed.
- 4.Read recognised media guidance on reporting suicide and mental illness.
- 5.Build a comparison table of dimensions before writing any prose.
Reference shortlist
These are authoritative starting points, not a ready-made bibliography. A qualified reviewer must confirm that each source fits the assignment and supports the claim beside which it is cited.
Nothing here is cleared for citation until you have read it.
- 01
Major Depressive Disorder
StatPearls, NCBI Bookshelf · 2024
The clinical baseline against which a news article's description of depression can be checked.
- 02
Depression
National Institute of Mental Health · 2024
Plain-language authoritative description of symptoms and treatment for comparison with media framing.
- 03
Bipolar Disorder
MedlinePlus, National Library of Medicine · 2024
Reference description of bipolar disorder where the chosen article covers that topic.
- 04
Suicide Prevention
National Institute of Mental Health · 2024
Authoritative guidance on suicide risk and prevention, including what responsible communication looks like.
Review before submission
Common mistakes
- Choosing an article older than a year, which the instruction rules out at the outset.
- Picking a story about mental health in general rather than one of the four named topics.
- Writing two separate summaries and calling the second half a comparison.
- Judging the articles as good or bad writing instead of as representations of a disorder.
- Ignoring the media paper guidelines document, which defines the criteria being marked.
- Repeating harmful framing in your own prose while criticising it in the article.
Submission checklist
- The chosen article is dated within the past six to twelve months.
- The chosen article covers depressive disorders, bipolar disorder, suicide or self-injury.
- Both articles are fully cited so the reader can find them.
- The comparison is organised by dimension, with both articles present in each section.
- Reporting standards are named and applied, not merely mentioned.
- The media paper guidelines have been re-read against the finished draft.
Use this guide to plan and review your own work. Follow your institution's rules and read our academic-integrity policy.

Written by
Aaron Bishop
MA, Education
assignment interpretation and research-methods coaching across disciplines
Aaron leads the EssayCrackers editorial desk. He works on how assignment briefs are read — what a rubric is actually asking for, and where students most often answer a different question than the one set.

Reviewed by
Dr. Nathan Cole
PhD, Rhetoric & Composition
Argumentation and thesis development
Nathan teaches first-year composition and directs a university writing center. He reviews EssayCrackers guides for argumentative soundness and citation accuracy.