They'll rarely if ever even mention cause of death with people who are in their 20s, 30s, 40s, but they bring it up in an article of a man who died at age 92??!
He obviously died of old age so the question is pretty much moot anyway, but even so, why hide the causes of deaths of younger people they way they do?

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59803766

On 12/28/2021 11:55 AM, RichA wrote:
> They'll rarely if ever even mention cause of death with people who are in their 20s, 30s, 40s, but they bring it up in an article of a man who died at age 92??!
> He obviously died of old age so the question is pretty much moot anyway, but even so, why hide the causes of deaths of younger people they way they do?
>
> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59803766

Maybe because a younger death is more likely "controversial".

On Tuesday, 28 December 2021 at 13:28:20 UTC-5, moviePig wrote:
> On 12/28/2021 11:55 AM, RichA wrote:
> > They'll rarely if ever even mention cause of death with people who are in their 20s, 30s, 40s, but they bring it up in an article of a man who died at age 92??!
> > He obviously died of old age so the question is pretty much moot anyway, but even so, why hide the causes of deaths of younger people they way they do?
> >
> > https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59803766
> Maybe because a younger death is more likely "controversial".

Censorship

On 2021-12-28 18:28:14 +0000, moviePig said:
> On 12/28/2021 11:55 AM, RichA wrote:
>>
>> They'll rarely if ever even mention cause of death with people who are
>> in their 20s, 30s, 40s, but they bring it up in an article of a man who
>> died at age 92??!
>> He obviously died of old age so the question is pretty much moot
>> anyway, but even so, why hide the causes of deaths of younger people
>> they way they do?
>>
>> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59803766
>
> Maybe because a younger death is more likely "controversial".

Probably linked with "Politically Correctness" stupidity, most media
news coverage in recent years has made it a point of not ever saying
anything about someone committing suicide. They instead just say the
person "died" (and then have some text telling you places to phone for
help if you are feeling depressed, etc., which simply emphasises the
fact that is was actually suicide).

In article <sqfttc$2ac$1@gioia.aioe.org>, Your Name
<YourName@YourISP.com> wrote:

> On 2021-12-28 18:28:14 +0000, moviePig said:
> > On 12/28/2021 11:55 AM, RichA wrote:
> >>
> >> They'll rarely if ever even mention cause of death with people who are
> >> in their 20s, 30s, 40s, but they bring it up in an article of a man who
> >> died at age 92??!
> >> He obviously died of old age so the question is pretty much moot
> >> anyway, but even so, why hide the causes of deaths of younger people
> >> they way they do?
> >>
> >> https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-59803766
> >
> > Maybe because a younger death is more likely "controversial".
>
> Probably linked with "Politically Correctness" stupidity,

Speaking of stupidity, you don't just report that someone has committed
suicide unless you're sure it's a fact, e.g., there are reliable
witnesses, or there's a finding from the medical examiner or a
coroner's jury.

> most media news coverage in recent years has made it a point of not
> ever saying anything about someone committing suicide.

"Most media news coverage" doesn't mention most people's obits at all.
Only the well-known or formerly well-known get that kind of treatment.

> They instead just say the person "died" (and then have some text
> telling you places to phone for help if you are feeling depressed,
> etc., which simply emphasises the fact that is was actually suicide).

Not really, no.