Reopening Wounds: Exploring the Ethics of True Crime Journalism
The mid-2010’s marked the beginning of the boom in the true crime genre. Programs that centered around crime storytelling excelled on media platforms like television, radio, and podcasts. Around the world people gasped and shuddered at the morbid details of these stories. All the while, the writers and creators of these shows reaped the financial reward. True crime stories are framed to give the audience a feeling of righteousness but their presence in the media does more harm than good. No matter how the stories are spun, true crime journalism can never be ethical because the pain of real people is sacrificed for entertainment purposes.
The ethical dilemma of true crime reporting is not a new one. Crime reporting blossomed in the newspapers of the 1800’s. In 1897, a group of journalists called the “Murder Squad” formed to assist police in investigations. The line between journalism and the law was blurred as the group impeded criminal investigations rather than helping (Bolin). Crime reporting in the 21st century faces a similar issue in crossing boundaries as the genre continues to gain more viewers and listeners. Now, programs like Netflix’s Making a Murderer and the podcast Serial attract the attention of millions of eager fans.
In Defense of True Crime
The recent rise of popularity in the true crime genre is largely credited to the power the audience feels. Americans are feeling the increasing weight of injustices like corporate greed, police brutality, and government corruption. True crime pieces ask the audience to take back some control and participate in correcting social injustices. Consuming a case and “discovering who is to blame, serves as both an escape and a means of feeling in control, giving us an arena where justice is possible” (Bolin). The audience is challenged to think critically about the justice system and the individuals in positions of authority. Putting power back into the hands of the people is not the only positive outcome of crime reporting. The podcast Crime Junkie exemplifies how writers can use true crime to assist in investigations. Hosts Ashley Flowers and Brittany Prawat bring cold homicide investigations and missing persons cases back into the public eye. Crime Junkie advocates for forgotten victims in hopes of bringing new tips to the police. In addition, Flowers and Prawat promote crime stopping organizations and encourage personal safety under their slogan: Be Weird. Be Rude. Stay Alive. Bringing attention to cold cases, advocating for personal safety, and encouraging citizens to think critically about the system are benefits of the growth of the true crime genre.
The Case Against True Crime
On the other hand, the creators of true crime programs harm vulnerable people to make financial gains. Stories are framed to make the audience feel good about themselves so they will keep watching, listening, and subscribing. The more these stories sell, the more money the writers receive. Thus, writers promote the idea that audience members are doing an honorable duty by participating in the true crime community. Tanya Horeck of The Conversation explains, “The ultimate aim of many true crime docu-series is to capture viewer attention and to keep audiences hooked through the use of cliffhangers and other devices.” This kind of viewer manipulation comes at a cost — the privacy of the individuals involved in the crime. Journalists often research legal documents, police files, and court footage to build their stories. All of these sources are open to the public. In other words, true crime reporters do not have to (and rarely do) ask those involved for permission to publicize information about the case. Victims, suspects, and law enforcement officers are often reduced to stock characters in stories drenched with dramatic and salacious themes. As a result, viewers can get their entertainment fix and distance themselves from the pain of the families and friends involved.
Mindy Pendleton was still mourning the loss of her stepson, the victim of a 2015 homicide, when Netflix approached her on making a docu-series featuring the case. Pendleton, along with the victim’s other family and friends, refused to cooperate and urged Netflix to stop the project. Through a series of passionate emails, Pendleton pleaded with the producers, “As a parent, a fellow human being, I beg you not to do this” (Chan). To the family’s dismay, Netflix premiered I Am A Killer to over 60 million US subscribers. The series has since been renewed for a third season, despite Pendleton’s argument that “it was inhumane to sell a documentary at the emotional expense of a grieving family” (Chan).
The Verdict
Upon examining true crime journalism, the possibility for writers to publicize crime in an ethical way is in question. Whether a writer’s intention is to educate or entertain, the impact of a piece relies on how the story is told. With a person’s innocence on the line, the reader should determine for themselves whether or not a suspect is guilty based on the facts of the case. However, it is impossible for a writer to tell a story without injecting some kind of bias. Furthermore, an objective true crime piece lacks the drama to attract a substantial audience. Even though true crime media promotes education on injustices in the legal system and personal safety, the ethical scale tips to protect the privacy of victims and their loved ones. Unless writers can present a case objectively, then true crime journalism will continue to reopen the wounds of traumatized family and friends every time someone clicks play.
Sources
Bolin, Alice. “The Ethical Dilemma of Highbrow True Crime.” The Vulture, 1 Aug 2018, https://www.vulture.com/2018/08/true-crime-ethics.html
Chan, Melissa. “’Real People Keep Getting Re-traumatized.’ The Human Cost of Binge-Watching True Crime Series.” Time, 24 Aug 2020. https://time.com/5825475/true-crime-victim-families/
Horeck, Tanya. “True crime: it’s time to start questioning the ethics of tuning in.” The Conversation, 16 Oct 2019, https://theconversation.com/true-crime-its-time-to-start-questioning-the-ethics-of-tuning-in-125324
Nice post!
You really make me stop and think about the things that I am watching or hearing on TV, streaming services, and podcasts. I can get lost in any type of content that is about murder or mystery.
I honestly never thought about how families and friends might be feeling about the whole situation. I guess I just assumed that they were 100% on board if the program aired. Looks like I was totally wrong there!
While reading, I totally did a search from some 1800’s newspaper articles on Google. I came across a lot of stuff about Jack The Ripper. I can only imagine how people were feeling or thinking about some of these articles. I know that these are just illustrations, but even though this was a different time, I am pretty sure the feels were still there when it comes to exploiting the people involved. If you or anyone is interested in the newspaper archives, here is the link: https://www.jack-the-ripper.org/newspaper-archive.htm
Lastly, I have to ask, have you listened to the podcast Hell and Gone? This is another true-crime podcast on iHeartRadio that zooms in on some cases here in Arkansas. Also, I just came across a podcast on Spotify called the True Crime Chronicles (https://open.spotify.com/episode/1oJIm9UgUZxJ6cGtYy2Elc?si=UhXa-enCTbyboeonK1dkMA). The link goes to another Arkansas case. I’m not sure if you’ve listened, but I just had to share.
I understand that true crime blogs and reporting can often open wounds and possibly be disrespectful to victims and their families, but I would argue that the attention garnered from this reporting can help solve cases and is appreciated by the families.
(I am one of those people who is unexplainably obsessed with true crime. I was reading my dad’s true crime magazines when I was eight. I, of course, would never allow my own kids to read this stuff! But he did, and ever since I was little, I’ve been a constant audience for the most disturbing stories out there. I would never want to disrespect anyone, and I hope that my interest will be seen as a good thing. I genuinely care about what happened to these people and want to see the perpetrators get caught.)
I will mention Michelle McNamara (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michelle_McNamara) who was a very well-articulated true crime blogger obsessed with true crime and with the Golden State Killer, in particular. The Golden State Killer raped over 50 women and killed thirteen known people all over Southern California in the mid-1970’s through the mid-80’s. Michelle’s interest in the crimes were featured on her blog, which led to an article in the L.A. Times and a book on the cases (https://www.google.com/books/edition/I_ll_Be_Gone_in_the_Dark/R7NuDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0), which renewed interest in the whole deal. She died while working on the book, and her husband, actor Patton Oswald, worked with her colleagues to finish it and see that the book was published. That book was a prelude to the DNA familial research that was the key to solving the case in 2018. She worked closely with authorities (https://www.oxygen.com/true-crime-buzz/how-did-paul-holes-trust-michelle-mcnamara-golden-state-killer-hunt-ill-be-gone-in-the-dark), and they said her insights and investigative work were crucial. She is the one who penned the name “Golden State Killer”. She passed away two years before Joseph James DeAngelo was arrested in 2018 for the Golden State Killer crimes. In this case, the family of one of DeAngelo’s victims wrote directly to McNamara to thank her for one of her articles (https://www.lamag.com/thejump/golden-state-killer-update-one-victims-family-responds-to-our-coverage-of-the-cold-case/), and many people involved with this case would argue that Michelle’s complete obsession with the case was the strongest factor in the outcome (DeAngelo has pleaded guilty and will spend the rest of his days behind bars, where he deserves to be.) Thank God the families and surviving victims finally know who was responsible. Many would argue that his arrest would not have been possible without Michelle’s dogged pursuit of the killer’s identity and written works about the case.
This was incredibly well written. I love the framing device. I also appreciate how you are using your rhetorical platform to advocate for dignity and ethics on behalf of grieving families. Well done!