True crime, real perversion
Photo courtesy of Siobhan Howerton/Pexels
True crime does not often afford proper respect to victims. Instead of glorifying real-life crimes and devastation, we should take advantage of the fictional stories that allow us to truly inhabit the perspective of investigators.
Between TikTok, podcasts, and even coloring books, true crime has made its way into public consciousness, and thus, public discourse. But a related genre that is long overdue for some critical assessment, to put it in terms of contrast, is “fake crime.” Dozens of seasons-long cable staples like Law & Order (1990-), Criminal Minds (2005-2020), and AnyMidsizeAmericanCity PD, plus countless spinoffs, exist in the American consciousness as well, but do not generally attract the same sensationalized attention, negative or positive. Even brief thought on this subject is useful for pointing out the failures and negatives of true crime as a genre, exposing the fact that the entertainment niche it supposedly fills has been occupied for years—by a much more ethical alternative.
There are some who would say true crime is an interest just like any other, even a fandom. Consumption has been likened to an enjoyment that one might find in horror movies. The adrenaline, catharsis, and sensationalized morbidity in both make for a very entertaining subject. Fiction crime shows contain all of those aspects too. For those looking for something gritty and realistic, shows like The Wire (2002-2008) are widely accessible. For more sensationalized stories, closer to something you might see in a horror movie, Criminal Minds (2005-2020) has every graphic, creepy, bloody detail you could ever wish for.
But for some, true crime is just said to “hit different.” Is it because the stories, by their pairing with reality, are somehow deeper? The truth is usually the opposite. In a TV show, there is a clearly defined plot and progression. Viewers are invited to feel as if they've been working the case alongside the detectives, and become invested in the same values that the idealized law enforcement is: protection, justice, and honor for the victims.
True crime, while it can involve the works of the law enforcement closest to the case, invites us to look into a different perspective. Fake crime media brings an audience into the role of the people looking to stop and protect others from the crime. Even though true crime is focused on real life events, audiences are not cast into real life roles. Because we cannot insert ourselves into events we know to be real, true crime leaves audiences in the role of spectators. Instead of empathizing with victims and protectors, an audience is abandoned to its popcorn and gossip. The focus in both cases is entertainment, but one of them reduces real victims into flat characters, while the other allows a wider population to reflect on horrors that can be very real in an unharmful setting.
While true crime can make some names famous, usually they are not the names of victims said respectfully in remembrance. Fake crime shows benefit from a storyline, and can bring back recurring villains and create notoriety without actually honoring the act of murder. True crime, contrastingly, platforms and sensationalizes the perpetrators of some of humanity's most horrible acts. This is the main aspect of the perversion of true crime that even the name invokes very strongly—what does it mean to be a “true crime fan,” except to be a fan of the crimes themselves? It's been widely documented that many of the most infamous killers have fanclubs, receive letters, and are found attractive. The argument of an appealing edginess is for debating which Ghostface is hottest—not for becoming emotionally connected to the worst of our society.