While watching some recent television series and movies, I came across a point of writing the plots and scripts that has come to bother me, and I hope that you have noticed this as well.

I'm sure the following experience will sound familiar to you: Your favorite television show or movie franchise has been going strong for a decent amount of time. The characters are well-fleshed out, the plot has thickened, and you can tell that the next plot twist will change the workings of the show or franchise in extreme ways. However, something happens that you weren't expecting. You thought the writers had a clear direction with where they intended the story line to go, leading towards a major event that you saw coming. The story gets there, eventually, but the climax loses itself in the middle of the set up, and why is that? Well, often, writers make a leap and try to create shock value, commonly through a major character death from out of the blue.

Now, to set the record straight, I am not against characters dying in media, especially when many of the environments in which stories are set would make it less believable if only minor side characters died. Death happens - I get it. However, as a writer, it bothers me when deaths happen solely for the sake of shock value, to create discussion and draw attention.

Game of Thrones comes to mind as a series that has handled writing very carefully, down to the letter. While, as a series, it has been noted for killing off scores of characters time and time again (must we ever forget the Red Wedding), but among the carnage, at least a far majority of the deaths have been for a reason. The series can only continue in its direction when certain characters have died, giving way for new character arcs in place of those that have come to an end, or have serious repercussions for other characters and the world as a whole.

In other cases, The Walking Dead serves at the forefront of my television expertise. As much as I love The Walking Dead and watching characters I have been invested in for years kill zombies, I've noticed that many deaths in recent seasons appear to be flippant reactions to a lull in views. As if someone looks at the chart of people watching, decides that the show needs to draw attention, and the writers conclude that they need to kill off a major character. Some deaths make sense, while others appear to only be a call for attention.

I think there should be a rule of thumb. If a writer, whether for television, movies, or novels, kills off a character they have brought to life, it should be for a cause. If a character has a name and has received enough attention where the audience could have formed an emotional attachment, their death should have ramifications for the future.

Writers, please, understand that killing characters for shock value is quickly becoming boring and expected. Make me feel the death, make other characters feel the death, or its not a death worth having.