The power of precaution: navigating content warnings in academia
Basic principles to guide the use of content warnings in higher education, based on a student-led day-long workshop which invited input from university staff and students
Created in partnership with
Created in partnership with
Content warnings have been used in popular media for decades to alert individuals to potentially sensitive or uncomfortable content. However, within an educational context, their implementation has been less common. Sensitive content is almost inevitable in a university setting, especially in subjects like history that require a retelling of past brutality and injustices. Without clear guidelines on how to handle such content, both students and staff can face confusion and discomfort.
In response to this challenge, we conducted a project at the University of Exeter as part of the Students as Change Agents programme to explore the use of content warnings in a learning environment. This culminated in the development of a day-long interactive experience that aimed to curate ideas and perspectives, directly from students and staff, concerning the use of content warnings.
- Socio-emotional learning online: boosting student resilience and well-being
- Engaging in controversial topics in teaching and research
- A trauma-sensitive approach to teaching and learning
To make the day as creative and collaborative as possible we created four activity stations, each concerned with one of the Ws of content warnings: who, what, where and why. We used different resources, such as Scrabble, Lego, interactive whiteboards and sticky note forums, through which participants could engage with each station. This allowed everyone to share their thoughts on each of the Ws in a holistic and visible way. At the end of the day, we chaired an online and in-person discussion based on the findings at each station. This provided valuable insights into the perspectives of staff and students regarding content warnings, and shaped the key takeaways presented in this article.
Content v trigger
Understanding rhetoric is crucial when approaching the topic of content warnings. Rhetoric, defined as the art of persuasive speaking or writing, plays a vital role in how content warnings are communicated and perceived. Discussions highlighted the importance of inclusive rhetoric in establishing the purpose and use of content warnings. At the Scrabble centred creative station, students highlighted phrases such as “everyone” and “compassion”, emphasising the need for inclusive language. We recommend using the term “content warnings” rather than “trigger warnings” to avoid assumptions and violent connotations and to help staff foster an inclusive environment.
What is the importance of rhetoric when approaching the topic of content warnings?
To establish guidelines for content warnings, we note that rhetoric must promote inclusivity and allow individuals to make their own judgements on whether they find the content potentially emotionally harmful. Content warnings offer students the choice to engage with material or opt out if it becomes overwhelming. We suggest staff provide students with choice to organise their studies around topics they’re more comfortable with, which can continue to foster engagement and motivation, even among more sensitive topics.
Who is responsible?
To explore the topic of inclusive responsibility, we posed a challenging question: “If everyone is responsible, does this risk meaning that no one is?” We’re all familiar with the idea of shared responsibility but what does this mean in an academic environment? On a practical level, students and staff do not share the same level of active authority when creating a compassionate learning space. The very same applies to the topic of content warnings. We must acknowledge and engage with the reality that there are differing spheres of responsibility within the academic environment.
To create any clear guidelines for content warnings, it became clear through our discussion that staff and students need distinct policies that hold their distinct groups accountable. Ultimately, within the academic environment, there are differing capability levels between staff and students, concerning the implementation of content warnings, and we advise that any content warning policy should reflect this. For example, staff undoubtedly have far greater agency than students in deciding what content gets featured in lectures and seminars. Staff policy should therefore allow for this. If a staff member is considering using potentially sensitive material within lectures or seminars, it should be policy that they caution students, several days ahead of exposure to the content.
Key takeaways
Our fourth station was perhaps the most reflective: a sticky note forum in which people could leave their thoughts and feelings on why content warnings mattered to them. This provided valuable insight for our discussion and allowed us to create guidance that married student thought and staff experience. We have curated four key takeaways from this project that we hope will aid any ongoing discussion and development of content warning policy.
1. Respect student autonomy: Allow students the choice to engage with challenging material or opt out if they find it overwhelming. Provide alternative materials alongside potentially sensitive content.
2. Communicate clearly: Implement content warnings based on clear institutional policies rather than leaving it to individual lecturers’ discretion.
3. Timing matters: Provide warnings in advance, allowing individuals to mentally prepare and make informed decisions.
4. Contextualise material: Use content warnings to educate students and peers about potential sensitivity, explaining why specific material requires a warning. This promotes understanding and clarity.
This project is the first step towards implementing universal campus guidelines. By combining student and staff input in the preliminary stages, we hope to provide a useful starting point for this work to be carried forward. A next step could be to use these initial findings to develop and inform a series of workshops and guidance documentation, which helps to embed clear, concise and compassionate policies on the use of content warnings within the university.
Andrea Namirembe and Ella Taviner are both third year BA history students at the University of Exeter.
If you would like advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the THE Campus newsletter.
