Buzz
True crime often blurs boundaries. Does the podcast you're hooked on or the murder series you're watching evoke empathy or serve as exploitation? Are you being educated or desensitized? Who benefits from this, and who is harmed? Is this really just entertainment?
The latest true crime case to capture the internet's attention is the heartbreaking story of 'van life' vlogger Gabby Petito, who was first reported missing on Sept. 11 while on a cross-country trip with her former fiancé, Brian Laundrie. Laundrie returned to Florida alone on Sept. 1, and after he disappeared, Petito's body was found in a Wyoming national forest on Sept. 19. (CNN has put together a comprehensive timeline of the case.) By Sept. 30, the hashtag #GabbyPetito had over one billion views on TikTok, and Slate’s ICYMI podcast has done an excellent job breaking down the complex elements of the case, from why we are drawn to true crime entertainment in general to how 'missing white woman syndrome' applies here, as well as how TikTok creators sometimes spread misinformation while engaging millions of viewers.
On social media, content creators—some acting out of genuine concern, others seemingly chasing viral success—have played pivotal roles in turning Petito’s death (which has been classified as a homicide) into a live, unfolding true crime story. As is increasingly common when certain crimes make headlines, many in the audience have gone beyond merely consuming true crime content to becoming amateur detectives, scouring the web for 'evidence' to support or confirm their own theories. (This concept even inspired the fictional Hulu series Only Murders in the Building, which follows three true crime podcast enthusiasts who launch their own investigation into a suspicious death closer to home.)
Social media sleuthing can yield mixed outcomes. ‘Armchair detectives’ have helped reopen cold cases (such as the high-profile Golden State Killer case), tracked down internet killers as shown in the Netflix series Don’t F**k With Cats, and identified hundreds of individuals suspected of involvement in the January 6th Capitol attack. However, there are also plenty of unqualified 'investigators' who end up doing more harm than good, such as when they falsely accused several people of being responsible for the 2013 Boston Marathon bombing.
Whether you become involved in the investigations yourself or not, there are no simple answers when it comes to the ethics of consuming true crime ‘content’ as casually as any other podcast or TV show. Being a thoughtful consumer requires you to think critically whenever you engage with a genre focused on real human victims (or in some cases, notably not focused on them). Below are some key questions that can help well-meaning true crime enthusiasts retain their empathy.
Recognize that fascination is natural
Experts, according to Insider.com, say that we're inherently drawn to cases like Gabby Petito’s, and that 'the interactive nature of social media can make people feel like they’re part of something larger.'
Cheyna Roth, a podcast producer for Slate and author of Cold Cases: A Collection of True Crime Mysteries, believes that people have always been captivated by a compelling mystery. People are also drawn to reality TV. Modern true crime blends both of these elements, using the engaging format of reality TV to delve into real-life mysteries; it’s only natural to get caught up in it. The problem arises when the audience forgets that this is not just a story for entertainment, but a real-life account of the worst—or final—day in someone’s life.
It’s not only common to have a morbid curiosity, but it’s also typical to possess a dark sense of humor. The sheer number and popularity of true crime comedy podcasts speak volumes (and exploring that genre could fill an entire book). In each episode of My Favorite Murder, arguably the most influential podcast in true crime comedy, hosts Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark often include a disclaimer explaining that humor is used as a coping mechanism, not to make fun of victims. However, for every listener who finds comfort in these jokes, there’s someone who feels they are disrespectful, problematic, or just wrong. The important question to ask yourself is: Who are the jokes aimed at, and who are they meant for?
Prioritize facts over theories
By maintaining a basic understanding of news literacy, you’ll be able to differentiate between solid journalistic facts and speculative content. While engaging in conspiratorial thinking may seem harmless, true crime misinformation, or even just poorly-informed speculation, always comes at the expense of a real individual and their loved ones.
Time and again, Roth has encountered the ‘bad’ side of true crime—the kind that focuses on the criminals and neglects to humanize the victims and their surviving families. Her advice is to encourage people to be thoughtful and to choose high-quality true crime content. There are many well-researched, compelling, and well-rounded books by professionals available, so there's no need to support productions that are unfair to victims or that spread false information.
Fortunately, not all social media sleuths are unscrupulous, and not all TikTok investigators are simply in it for the attention. The account @crimewithsondra is an example of someone who consciously prioritizes facts over speculation in her videos. Sondra has shared that her goal is to provide factual information above all else—she’s not a detective, nor does she aspire to be an 'influencer.' She emphasizes that the families involved in the cases are always at the forefront of her mind, and believes that perhaps the same should be true for the audience consuming the content.
These are real individuals, not fictional characters.
Roth emphasizes that listeners should be able to discern when content portrays victims with care and empathy. 'The story feels less exploitative when it offers a more complete perspective and considers the surviving family,' she explains. 'For instance, by asking for consent and presenting the victims as real people, not just characters in a sensational tale.'
Another approach to focusing on the victims is what Sondra refers to as the 'that's my birthday, too' moment: This is when you uncover something about the victim that makes them more relatable and human, triggering the thought 'that could have been me.'
Sondra believes that this kind of emotional response can also benefit the real people involved in these cases, as long as it aids in spreading accurate information. She argues that 'true crime helps transform a 'missing person' photo into a public recognition that this is someone’s child.'
This suggests a way to ethically engage with true crime. As Alison Foreman wrote for Mashable, 'perhaps by shifting their fandom’s efforts from amateur detective work to informed entertainment criticism, true crime fans can positively influence America’s understanding of justice as a whole. If they can resist becoming desensitized and instead refocus on the human aspect of these stories, they can honor the real people at the core.'
Consider your actions before sharing online.
True-crime journalist Billy Jensen believes in the impact of fans taking action. 'I genuinely believe citizens... can assist in resolving the backlog of unsolved murders, violent crimes, and missing persons,' he stated in his bestselling book Chase Darkness with Me: How One True Crime Writer Started Solving Murders.
However, Roth, a former prosecutor, is wary of this perspective. She believes that the involvement of unqualified voices not only adds unnecessary distractions to an investigation but can also harm active cases by spreading false information. As the conclusion of the Gabby Petito episode of Vox’s Today, Explained reminds us, the subjects in these stories are not fictional—they are real individuals, so remember to 'Sleuth responsibly.'
Even if you're not producing your own videos or diving into personal theories on Reddit, it's important to be careful with what you comment on and share. Sondra encourages true crime followers to put themselves in the family’s position, especially before commenting on her videos: 'Think—what if the family saw this? How would they feel? How would I feel?'
Continue to wrestle with the difficult questions.
Like a skilled detective, keep probing deeper—not into the case itself, but into what draws you in and why it captures your attention.
Questioning yourself can be a challenging, and often uncomfortable, task. Dr. Amanda Vicary, a social psychologist and chair of the psychology department at Illinois Wesleyan University, and a self-identified true crime enthusiast, shared with Mashable that
There must be some truly shocking violations to make people pause and reflect on what they’re observing... when I watch a show or something, I never stop to question, ‘Did the victim’s family agree to this?’ If I don’t think that way, I imagine others don’t either.
As with any form of ethical consumerism, the key is to be intentional and mindful about what you’re consuming and the reasons behind it. Roth suggests, “Maybe that’s the most crucial element. Continuously reflect. Keep questioning whether the story is responsible. Ask if this is contributing positively or negatively—ultimately, isn’t that the responsibility of any consumer?”
Push yourself further
Popular YouTuber Ada On Demand released a video discussing the ethics of profiting from tragedy, offering clear advice: “Let’s be more active consumers of true crime. Sign those petitions, visit GoFundMe pages... this can be a joint effort between [consumers] and creators to make this space more focused on victims, less about ‘just-for-entertainment.’”
No matter how you engage with true crime, there’s a price to your consumption—and the victims have already paid enough.
