True crime is an obsession these days. From books to podcasts to Netflix specials, true crime is everywhere. Let’s be real - we’ve all watched an episode of Dateline or Unsolved Mysteries (are you team original or revival?). But, where do we draw the line?
Unless you’re a member of the National Advocacy Credentialing Program, you don’t necessarily have to sign off on particular codes of ethics. Typically, each individual office will create their own ethical guidelines. But, most don’t include anything related to true crime. What individuals choose to do in their off-time is their own. However, we should take a few moments to have a brief discourse about advocates and true crime.
If you’ve ever watched any true crime documentaries or listened to any podcasts, you’ve probably noticed that advocates aren’t interviewed very often. This is due to the nature of true crime - documentarians, journalists and podcasters are entertainers. They’re telling a story through a specific lens with the goal of getting views or listens. Now, from some perspectives, certain storytellers claim that they’re just trying to bring awareness to the subject or case - but they choose a specific aspect of it. That’s the number one rule of storytelling - fine tune your subject. Create a thesis. What do you want people to walk away thinking after they hear the story you’ve told?
Enter advocates. Most true crime focuses on the drama, the intrigue. Understanding victims’ rights isn’t necessarily glamorous to many storytellers. And, to us, it’s a violation of the rapport we’ve built with a victim and their family. There are things the victims’ family might tell us that a storyteller would be interested in - but that’s not the storyteller’s business. Those are things the family should choose to disclose, not the advocate.
But what about when we participate in it? When we sit in front of the TV or plug a podcast into our car for the drive home. Doesn’t that make us complicit?
The short answer: yes. The longer answer? It’s up to you.
I have a confession - I’m obsessed with true crime. I have one or two podcasts I listen to religiously (mainly for the hosts - I have a specific vetting system), and I tend to stream true crime TV or documentaries when I’ve got nothing else to do.
It’s a personal choice. I’ve always been interested in mystery and history. I read most of the Nancy Drew books as a child and can be found researching various topics at any given time of day. I didn’t used to be interested in true crime, though. That started after I became an advocate.
I think my work piqued my interest. After hearing details of cases in court, I found myself watching and listening to shows featuring things similar to what I’d see in court. At first, it was more or less to measure up how similar the cases were (spoiler alert - there’s actually a lot of similarities in murder.). And, because of my personality, I wanted to critique the shows for details or analysis they leave out (spoiler alert #2 - it’s usually the victims and their rights). The more and more I listened, the more and more I couldn’t stop.
As advocates, when we talk about self-care, we talk about things that take our mind off the vicarious trauma we might experience at work. Ideally, you’d do things that are different from what’s coming across your desk. You’d avoid exposure to the same things. I guess I missed that memo somewhere. I enjoy watching true crime - maybe because it’s familiar. I see it every day at work.
And, to be fair, I’m usually doing something else while I’ve got the true crime going. Focusing on driving, crocheting a blanket for friends, typing out an email… it’s just playing in the background.
But, it’s important to remember that everyone is not me. So, let’s get real. Is it problematic for advocates to engage in true crime? At the end of the day, it’s a personal opinion. For many advocates, they don’t want to hear the same details at home they do in court. They also don’t want to potentially see or hear a case they worked in be misrepresented in any way. And, for some, it’s almost as though they’re complicit in the retraumatization that true crime can give to co-victims. And don’t we make a conscious effort to avoid that for the victims we serve?
That’s why I feel we should take that field back. On our podcast, Serving Victims Through the System, we sometimes cover cases and look at them from a victim services perspective and put some trauma-informed analysis into the case. Sure, we cover the ‘interesting’ details, but those details are opportunities for us to expand on how players in the field can respond proactively instead of retroactively.
I’ve seen some kitschy true crime shows (hello, Murder Behind Mansion Walls) and some really decent ones (hello, Unsolved Mysteries revival). I’ve heard some not-so-good true crime podcasts that everyone thinks is great (yep, talking about you, Crime Junkie) and others that I listen to each week when a new episode comes out (oh, hey there Morbid, yah weirdos).
At the end of the day, we need to be cognizant about the true crime we engage with. Parents of Murdered Children has a huge campaign called Murder is Not Entertainment, which advocates against storytellers exploiting the stories of murder victims (among other things). Now, I think there’s some serious points to unpack there. The premise of the program makes complete sense. But, storytellers are gonna storytell. Where we can change the mold is participation and respect.
Some families don’t want their loved ones’ experience to be blasted all over the screen. And, if so, then it shouldn’t. When a family says ‘we don’t want our loved one’s murder on your show,’ then you should respect them. If you cover a case and a family comes back and says ‘please take that down,’ do it. Don’t ask any questions.
On the other hand, families should feel confident about sharing their loved one’s story. If a family wants to share their loved one’s story because it’s one that needs to be heard (I’m of the opinion that all murder victims deserve to have their stories told), then cover the story and cover it well.
As for advocates, exercise some critical thinking. You know when something's not quite right. You know when a network is just trying to push a particular agenda. But, stay up to date on some of the real cases going on out there - who knows, it just might help you out in better serving your victims.