The ethics of true crime in entertainment
by Yasmine Rivera @mindovermatteris @literatihaven
For years now, my social media feeds have been perpetually flooded with videos dissecting the details of ongoing criminal investigations. What’s more, the content has become more prolific with time. I often find myself feeling disturbed by the intrusive nature of the videos being posted.
One case in particular that caught my attention, is that of 22-year-old Gabby Petito. In July 2021, she embarked on a road trip across the U.S. with her fiance Brian Laundrie. Whilst they travelled the country, the couple vlogged their experience and posted to various social media platforms, namely Instagram. However, Laundrie returned home alone on September 1, and ten days later, Petito was declared missing. As I continued to scroll through, I stumbled upon numerous accounts dedicated to theorizing on the case.
How we consume true crime
True crime is an increasingly popular genre, capturing the fascination of millions. It delves into the darkest aspects of human nature, exploring tragedies and criminal cases. According to BBC Science Focus, our brains are naturally attuned to mystery, specifically ones that help us identify behavioural clues that allow us to protect ourselves from undergoing similar experiences. True crime perfectly caters to this formula.
Petito’s case went viral on social media, particularly TikTok, sparking theories and updates from countless users. As the police investigation continued, users took it upon themselves to act as detectives. The FBI and local authorities received over 1000 tips with many alleging that Petito had been spotted at various locations across the country, according to The New York Times.
This misinformation was detrimental to the investigation as well as the coverage surrounding it. By sending the police on various, untrue leads, viewers inadvertently wasted police resources and diverted media attention. In reality, Laundrie had strangled Petito days before he returned, leaving her remains in Bridger-Teton National Forest, according to NBC News.
The media interest surrounding Petito’s case is not shocking. Fifty per cent of Americans regularly consume true crime content in the forms of podcasts and TV shows, according to YouGov. However, Petito’s case highlights the influence that social media has on the genre.
“We often lose sight of the real human stories behind these cases, instead treating them as entertainment.”
While true crime documentaries and long-form content take deliberation and editing, social media clips take mere minutes to produce. This allows users to interact with the investigation by contributing to the media narrative and attempting to uncover private details, all in real-time. Petito’s case exemplifies how true crime content blurs the lines between viewer interest and interference.
Although some true crime content originates from genuine concern and a desire for justice, the genre harbours a more ominous aspect. Many content creators exploit cases in order to gain popularity and profit. In their pursuit of engagement, they often lose sight of the real human stories behind these cases, instead treating them as entertainment.
“Are you not entertained?”
A reminder that we as humans have found ways to make barbaric acts entertainment as far back as the Roman Empire…
The cost of sensationalising crime
On November 13, 2022, four students from the University of Idaho were killed in their home near campus. No suspects were initially named. No murder weapon was found. No obvious trace of the killer was left at the scene. The lack of information on the case sparked fury from the college community. This frustration was shared by millions of spectators across the world, largely through the use of the TikTok hashtag “#idahomurders”, accumulating over 1 billion views. After three weeks, the FBI identified the killer as Brian Kohberger, a criminal justice student seeking to earn his doctorate at a local university.
As the story gained increasingly widespread public interest, viewers began to accuse members of the University of Idaho community of the students’ murder. TikTok “psychic” Ashley Guillard, with a following of over 115K, accused university professor Rebecca Scofield of becoming romantically involved with one of the victims and that their relationship was Scofield’s reason for murder, according to Time Magazine. These accusations were detailed throughout approximately 50 videos. Following two ignored cease and desist orders, Scofield filed a defamation lawsuit, citing emotional distress.
Scofield’s experience should serve as a cautionary tale for all of us. The extensive, unfounded accusations made by Guillard are an extreme example of the lengths that viewers will go to to immerse themselves in the narratives of cases.
The consequences of crime sensationalization are far-reaching. Victims and their families suffer not only from the trauma of the crimes but also from the public’s insatiable desire for details, not to mention the constant rehashing of their trauma. Furthermore, the genre can contribute to misinformation and confusion, as uneducated viewers make speculative accusations.
So, is watching true crime ethical?
It is essential for true crime consumers to be mindful of the way they interact with content. While it’s natural to be curious about mysterious cases, it’s important to remember the people at the centre of these stories. True crime shouldn’t be a media spectacle.
Instead, it should be a way to raise awareness for victims affected by the crimes committed. So, we must engage with the genre responsibly and always hold empathy for the true stories discussed.
Behind the TikToks, documentaries and podcasts are real human lives.