With the rise in streaming services like Netflix and apps such as TikTok over the past decade, true crime has become a form of media that has cemented the idea that careers can be built on the misfortunes of the homicides and missing persons cases that have intrigued public imagination. Dealing with such sensitive topics in crime, it is inevitable that when a content creator is caught up in the relevancy of the algorithm, the sanctity of the content being delivered in a tasteful manner becomes secondary.
Going back to the 19th century, the attention that cases like the Jack the Ripper murders and the serial killings of HH Holmes, true crime became a central interest in the psychology of those fascinated by horror, especially in that of nonfiction. In an interview with Professor Bernice Murphy, a professor of Popular Literature at Trinity, she notes that while social media has been paramount to its rise, true crime has “always been a massive genre, it is just how it manifests” across the public sphere.
As such horrific and graphic cases ring home about how the true “evil entity” that takes centre stage in horror is the moral downfalls of human nature, the number one question that springs to mind is: “Why would someone become so enthralled by the very worst qualities of man?”
Psychologist Paul Rozin developed a theory to explore this phenomenon known as “hedonic reversal”. This describes the feeling of excitement that arises from consuming content that produces increased nervousness and fear while understanding you are not the victim of the act being committed. The consumption of such content creates a sense that you are an insider on the facts of a case with all of the twists and turns that a case has. Creators feed into this by needing to be more provocative in their handling of retelling a case in order to give themselves a sense of importance by framing themselves as some sort of alternative detective.
On top of the problematic aspects of true crime, gender imbalances fuel this fire. In the media, Professor Murphy notes how because “there is a sensational angle, there has been a tradition to focus on the perfect victim”. The image of a “perfect victim” in the media would usually be a white woman. This has led to some cases, particularly those where victims were women of colour or male, not garnering the same level of media coverage. Professor Murphy cites the serial killings of Samuel Little, who targeted female sex workers, addicts, and the homeless, to support this, explaining that in order to maximise the level of public knowledge about a case, “it depends on the individual piece of media”, especially because in this context, “there is the race element to it as there are cases that are not always looked into”. Crafting the stereotypical image of the individual who would “usually” be at the mercy of nefarious crimes takes away from providing answers to crimes committed against other individuals.
Professor Murphy discusses how in the peculiar attraction to those who commit egregious crimes such as mass killings, “it is usually women who are attracted to serial killers and there is an unhealthy attachment with this that he won’t do the same to me”. This mentality that Professor Murphy discusses in the interview is known as “hybristophilia”, a psychological phenomenon in which people, especially women, find themselves developing an attraction to those who commit criminal offences of a serious nature. Professor Murphy notes the problematic nature of these ideas because, for example, male criminal perpetrators have been on the receiving end of fandom as “female prisoners get letters too”. However, this is not reported on as widely.
While coverage on true crime has been crucial in spreading awareness about the dangers of society, there are many exploitative aspects to the genre that have made the integrity of the documentation of these crimes worsen due to the need for relevancy by content creators. There is also a distortion of the idea of who can be considered the so-called “victims” of crime.
