True crime has always been a popular subject in the media. According to Simmons College Library, the genre dates all the way back to the 16th century and was only available to the upper class. True crime was originally “a development of criminal justice and the printing press,” already a product for enjoyment. Despite the genre being a year-round hit, the Halloween season is the perfect time to listen to or watch true crime.
In this way, true crime has become more entertainment than tragedy. Recently, Netflix made an adaptation based on the life of infamous serial killer Jeffery Dahmer, titled Dahmer-Monster: the Jeffery Dahmer Story. Did we really need another one? According to Relevant Magazine, “Wikipedia lists Jeffrey Dahmer projects that have been released since 1992. By comparison, there have been 12 Batman movies and TV shows produced in the same amount of time.” The concept of true crime compared to other genres is all about supply and demand. There is a huge audience for thrilling and psychological atrocities, but it comes at a price.
After Dahmer came out, many people went to social media to share their reactions to the television show. There was an uprise of people sexualizing not only Evan Peters (the actor that played Jeffery Dahmer), but Dahmer himself. On TikTok, @niruanya made a video criticizing @the_mannii for his video of lusting after Peters along with the caption “Its Evan Peters giving Dahmer sexy vibes 🥵.” Although it is alarming, this is not the only unsettling reaction. Emily Nolan on Twitter recounts that “there is a whole trend of white women on TikTok flexing how they were so ‘unbothered’ and ‘unfazed’ by the Dahmer series on Netflix. if you find the depiction of heinous targeted murders of LGBT and black/brown people ‘not disturbing enough’ then something is wrong with you.” Newsweek offers more examples of Dahmer viewers being tone-deaf about the subject matter; there are numerous complaints that the show was not morbid enough or that the series did not phase them. The way the audience responds to true crime fuels the commodification of violence fit for the corporate agenda.
Because of these reactions, victims are overlooked as platforms profit from trauma. There have been multiple criticisms about how Netflix is capitalizing on the pain of the victims’ families. During an Insider interview, Rita Isbell, sister of Erroll Lindsey (one of Dahmer’s victims) said, “I was never contacted about the show. I feel like Netflix should’ve asked if we mind or how we felt about making it. They didn’t ask me anything. They just did it.” The victims’ families’ permission was not needed nor included in the making of the Dahmer production because “studios and producers don’t legally need consent to tell someone else’s story” (Zeefeed). Netflix and other streaming services are notorious for using their platform to take advantage of the pain and tragedy of others for content. For corporations to benefit from suffering is not new, but it does bring to question the morality of consuming certain biopics and media.
This article is not trying to discourage people from listening to or watching anything related to true crime. However, I think it is important to be mindful of how we perceive or react to dramatic portrayals of real-life figures. There is a recent conversation online about if true crime can be ethical. The short answer is “no,” as it “blurs lines.” Personally, I agree. Although I do tend to watch some true crime documentaries, I have noticed a spike in uncomfortable content on social media in regard to the Dahmer show and other serial killers (i.e. making trends based around killers and their victims). Shows have sensationalized and glorified violence and audiences find it difficult to frame the narrative in reality. Unless the media reframes the conversation around helping victims, true crime is being made for consumption and exploitation. People forget that there are real people behind the stories.