True crime has possibly become one of the most popular and, frankly, divisive genres to grace television in the past decade. From the compelling storylines of Making a Murderer to the courtroom melodrama of The People v. O.J. Simpson, viewers have flocked to take in real-life tales of crime, punishment, and justice. While drawing huge audiences, the genre of true crime shows has framed popular conceptions about crime and justice, and the administration of criminal justice, in ways that are highly controversial in relation to questions of media ethics. Equally, it has driven podcasting and documentary filmmaking and a wider cultural interest in criminal investigations. This article examines the extent to which true-crime TV has impacted popular culture, from how people consume media to societal attitudes and the murky ethics of dramatization.
The Rise of True Crime Television
Sudden interest in true crime television made a lot of advancement during the 2010s, especially with such series as Making a Murderer, which came out in 2015, and The People v. O.J. Simpson: American Crime Story in 2016. The success of these series turned the genre into a boom, where networks and even streaming services wanted to plunge into this so attractive genre. Making a Murderer, which follows the story of Steven Avery-a man wrongfully convicted of a crime, later accused of another-sent audiences through its winding narrative, while having real-life implications about the justice system. On the other hand, The People v. O.J. Simpson dramatizes the infamous 1995 O.J. The murder trial of Simpson-not only did it re-ignite the public’s interest in the case but also brought into focus the various cultural and racial tensions surrounding the case.
It is these, along with many other shows, that became other than entertainment; they were cultural events that drove public discourse about criminal justice, systemic bias, and sensationalism in the media. The runaway success that such shows enjoyed derived from an insatiable public fascination with mystery in reality and growing public distrust of the criminal justice system regarding highly publicized cases.
Shaping Public Perceptions of Crime and Justice
One of the deepest influences of true crime shows is that they shape the view of the general public about crime and justice. Some, like Making a Murderer, have brought to the public’s attention issues such as wrongful conviction, police malfeasance, and defects within the system of criminal justice. Sometimes, audiences get emotionally attached to such cases, leading to heated debates and even campaigns of advocacy. For instance, the fame of Making a Murderer demanded Steven Avery’s exoneration through social media campaigns such as #FreeStevenAvery.
True crime shows present crimes and investigations from the point of view that is focused on moral ambiguity and the eventuality of wrong condemnations. Consequently, true crime demands its audience question any eventuality that the justice system is efficient and competent to make proper adjudication of the cases. But not all of this is done in a balanced way, and there are those critics who point out that the genre sensationalizes crimes and tends to paint a biased picture concerning justice, often emphasizing high-profile or rare cases to misshape public perception.
Thirdly, these programs distort audiences’ perception of criminal actions. Offenders in most the true crime documentaries and dramatizations are represented as either pure evil or as victims of circumstance. Such simplification serves to attribute blame on complex psychological, social, and economic factors that predispose people to criminal activities. Whereas some shows make an adequate attempt to allow for such complexity, other shows will revert to sensationalism and dramatize at the expense of subtlety.
The Ethical Dilemma: Sensationalizing Real Life
One of the bigger controversies with true crime TV is the ethical problem in dramatizing events that are real, traumatic, tragic, and even continued in legality. Such programs have been criticized for exploiting victims and their families for the sake of entertainment. The line between responsible storytelling and exploitation is often very blurred, and even more so when producers seek to dramatize cases that have not been resolved or whose legal outcomes remain uncertain.
One example of this is the case of Making a Murderer, the story of Steven Avery and his plight through the courts, yet at times, he is accused of only telling one side of the story to bias public opinion. The series questions the adequacy of Avery’s trial; however, this series has also been criticized for leaving out much information that would enable viewers to receive a more balanced understanding. The ethical concerns grow even more intense when the victims of the crimes involved are portrayed. Are these victims being treated with dignity, or have they become a plot device for the sake of entertainment?
The ethical entanglements become more complex once real people-victims, suspects, police officers, and others-are on screen. In most instances, the families of those concerned may have little control over how their stories come across, and this can be seen by them as exploitation. Some true crime shows tried to balance their storytelling with sensitivity, everything from disclaimers to outlets for the victims’ families to express their perspectives.
The Emergence of Podcasts and Documentaries
Success with the genre on the small screen simply leaked into the now increasingly popular formats of true crime podcasts and documentary filmmaking. Programs such as Serial-a podcast that reinvestigates the 1999 murder of Hae Min Lee and the subsequent conviction of Adnan Syed-reached such unprecedented levels of success that allowed many other true crime-themed podcasts to emerge. It was Serial that put investigative storytelling with journalistic rigor on the air and enthralled audiences, inspiring a new crop of listeners interested in in-depth explorations of real-life crimes.
True-crime documentaries have given way to true-crime podcasts, reflecting a new, more interactive dimension in how audiences engage with such stories. They offer a sense of intimacy and immediacy, allowing listeners to follow along with the investigation as it unfolds. There is also an added advantage with podcasts of not having a constraint regarding time as there would be with television. It can therefore delve into the legal proceeding and discussion of forensic evidence and psychological profiles of those implicated in the crime. My Favorite Murder and Criminal are just two of the true crime podcasts to have amassed huge followings-proving the genre could remain versatile beyond the screen.
True crime documentaries have also been successful, for instance, the release of the series The Jinx: The Life and Deaths of Robert Durst in 2015 and The Keepers in 2017 was made possible on networks such as HBO and Netflix. The documentaries indeed delve into the cases more profoundly than their television counterparts and give the audience a deeper look into the investigation of criminal events. The same level of suspense and drama desired by viewers is also maintained.
Fascination with Crime
It speaks to something deeply fascinating about crime and its punishment that has taken hold of humanity. To many, it’s the ultimate psychological puzzle: understanding what drives people to do terrible things, and how society punishes them for those actions. True crime shows allow audiences a peek into the darker corners of human behavior-as one would with some sort of voyeuristic interest in intrigue and drama.
This is a cultural tension that balances entertainment with ethics. While the shows bring critical issues to light, they also more often than not blur the lines separating factual reporting from sensational storytelling. As this genre of television continues to evolve, creators will need to balance their desires for compelling narratives with a responsibility for airing the cases with integrity and sensitivity.