I Am Tired of True Crime

Good intentions are the pathway to Hell, we are so often told – and that seems to be the way with true crime podcasts. Initially, the genre was groundbreaking, especially for the ability to bring stories often unseen publicly to everybody’s ears. But this is a genre that has sometimes evolved into something of a vehicle that is not good for everyone. Podcasts are a space where information is transmitted – but common ground rules are missing. This is problematic at the best of times. 

Serial and the birth of the true crime podcast

Although it was not the first – or last – podcast, Serial set the gold standard for true crime podcasts. It arguably also had influence across the UK, such as with Untold: The Daniel Morgan Murder following. (You can read about the influence of Serial on that particular podcast here.) Australia has a similar version with Trace. The genre archetype true crime podcast explores possible ongoing investigations, or reconstructs timelines of gory and grisly crimes, sometimes going back decades. That has worked pretty well up until now. There is even ground to suggest that podcasts have managed so successfully in this format, enough so that crimes have since been re-examined, such as on the grounds of miscarriages of justice. In the Dark is an example of this, for instance.

To bring a story alive, to new listeners, those stakes are incredibly powerful – and something that is not exactly easy to pull off. But there is a lack of common principles governing the podcast world that all abide by to meet a certain standard. Writing about podcasts as a journalist who covers disability and social justice issues is quite something – but questions should be raised when a press release makes its way to your inbox advertising letters and audio of notorious serial killers in the form of a podcast. That is entering new ground that is potentially unethical to some, but is the very tip of the iceberg. 

We need to build the ground rules

Take journalism in its most idealistic form, and set aside your personal views for the moment. Journalists are trained to cut through hubris of government distortion to find truth – because we have agreed a common standard of how this works, such as with established legal systems, the structure of stories and how to organise information. Regardless of what you may think politically, this has been a system that has been in place for decades, and has worked well for almost as long. Journalists are not perfect, not by any means; it is an imperfect craft, one that is continually evolving. Regulations are somewhat lacking when it comes to the podcast world, as are standards everyone agrees to – and a perfect example is of that when it comes to topics such as advertising. 

The podcaster Joe Rogan recently made some controversial comments about vaccines and “young people” – but they were swiftly clarified, too. (You can read more about that here.) Opinion/Comment and fact are deliberately kept separate when it comes to the news, yet podcasts can blend both into a tangled mix that can be difficult to untangle and unpick, or even just to distinguish between the two. This is arguably a space of new influencers, where there isn’t so much regulation either. It presents a problem. There is arguably an influence that also comes with a platform offered by a podcast, and one that is, right now, unchecked. 

Read more: Over 200 Audio Professionals Sign Anti-Racist Open Letter to Public Media

Themes such as theories of motives for crimes are okay to explore when it comes to true crime podcasts. It is needed to arguably make a podcast “work” when it comes to the topic of a crime committed. Besides, you have the phrase of “motive, opportunity and means” – the three main concepts considered when it comes to looking into and solving a crime. But evidence needs to be considered carefully while also being grounded in fact. Morphing into conspiracy theories can be problematic unless there is proper factual grounding, especially when it comes to speculation. 

Crime does not just impact a victim, but the people who are left behind, families splintered and fractured by a hugely tragic event. We consume this in media form – but becoming fodder for listeners needs a boundary at times. Not everyone cooperates with a podcast host, and may wish for privacy at times. Just think: is it really right to be listening to a podcast devoted to all things Britney Spears right now? The legend herself did describe media coverage being hypocritical previously, too – enough so there are a few Instagram posts about it. You can create a podcast about a person who maybe will not co-operate with you, but boundaries are needed – because they are human beings, too. 

Where do we go from here?

Any media consumed is imperfect and is always evolving – enough so that long term solutions are not always the “fix” that is needed. Podcasting we know to be a sustainable niche, given its popularity and growth over the years as an industry generally speaking. 

I am tired of true crime podcasts. The idea of fodder, or consuming someone else’s tragedy, does not sit right with me as a listeners, and leaves a bad feeling while listening in. There needs to be a degree of standards across podcasts, to prevent disinformation and conspiracy theories spreading , to separate opinion/comment and fact,  as well as to deal respectfully with subjects of those impacted by true crime. Times are changing, and we need to look at ourselves with some self awareness.