Telepathic Judas

Turns: 0

Two and a Half Men would be a lot darker

        if it were about cannibals

Bottom Right Tile is Dominant

Drag other tiles towards dominant right tile amen

On December 28th, 2023 at 3:30 AM, Gypsy Rose Blanchard was released from the Chillicothe Correctional Center in Chillicothe, Missouri. Blanchard was charged in the second-degree murder of her mother, Dee Dee Blanchard, in 2015. Since Blanchard’s release, she has been advocating for the victims of Factitious disorder imposed on another, formerly known as Munchausen syndrome by proxy. Besides the actual details of the crime that made Blanchard’s case so widespread in American media, it was also the widespread coverage of her case that propelled Blanchard into celebrity. Since Blanchard’s release she has been a mainstay in American Pop Culture, both digitally and through television; Blanchard has made appearances on The View, CBS: This Morning, as well as her Instagram hosting 8.3 million followers. Whilst Blanchard has been adamant that she is not trying to profit from her mother’s murder nor her conviction, but rather spread her advocacy and charity work. However, the negative backlash that stems from Blanchard’s newfound celebrity is not directed at Blanchard herself or her character, but the oddity that is found within her being a celebrity. Americans have seen celebrities being convicted and accused of horrific crimes, such as the 1994 case of former NFL football player OJ Simpson, in which he was accused and acquitted in the murder of his ex-wife Nicole Simpson; however, Americans have very seldomly seen a convicted criminal to this extent be held with such intrigue and positive recognition. Whilst most of this support for Blanchard stems from factors surrounding the case and ethical dilemmas that are posited in within the actual details of the murder and following trial, the actual rise of Blanchard’s celebrity is due to the widespread coverage and the rise in true crime as a genre of media that we consume, whether through social media, television, or film. Whilst cases such as OJ Simpsons and Gypsy Rose’s may partially be sensational due to the details of the case, we can examine their celebrity outside the case, such as with documentation of the case. This documentation is often termed as ”True Crime” within media, simply put, True Crime is the telling of true crime stories whether it be through TV, Podcasts, Movies, etc. True Crime appeals to both audiences and media agencies for a couple main reasons, such as the idea that True Crime itself is an easy idea and narrative to tell; Depending on the case, the story is over thus negating the need to develop a fictious story. In addition, stories that are common within the True Crime often hold an easy to articulate beginning, middle, and end (in some the lack of a resolution serves as an anti-resolution). In addition to this, this subgenre of media is True, meaning it really happened, which is one of the many reasons why True Crime has is rising highly amongst the American populus. As True Crime has risen as a popular form of storytelling, there have been both positive and negative arguments lobbied towards its content. Arguments in favor of True Crime claim that it is informative whilst providing entertainment, whilst arguments against True Crime claim it is distasteful and sensationalizes the criminal acts that are portrayed. When determining an accurate ethical and philosophical standpoint to take on True Crime, one must consider these arguments into more detail to properly determine the validity of these arguments within the ethical dilemma that is True Crime. The arguments against True Crime often discuss the perceived distastefulness that is perceived to be present within True Crime, for example, one may see the focus on any present gory details that are present within a sample of True Crime programming. Another point of contention is the focus on the perpetrator and a lack of attention towards the victims of crimes. Prepotents of against True Crime often state that this perceived focus on the perpetrator leads to viewers seeing criminal actives as justifiable and may even seek to emulate such behavior, this complaint is often spoken about in regard to mass-killing events such as school shootings. In regards to the emulation of this criminal activity, it is often referred to as “general imitation.” In Jonathan W. Ivy and James N. Meindl’s essay on the subject, “Mass Shootings: The Role of the Media in Promoting Generalized Imitation,” they summarize general imitation as the following: “Several variables affect generalized imitation. In general, people are more likely to imitate a model who is similar to themselves, particularly in terms of age and gender; who is of an elevated social status; who is seen being rewarded; and who is seen as competent.” Another complaint lodged against True Crime is that it enables viewers to play detective, that often when a True Crime series becomes popular, viewers will become intrigued and invest themselves heavily invested in the case covered and will cross various obvious and objective lines, such as harassing family members and person(s) involved, searching for evidence on private property, calling false leads, etc. Examples of this sleuthing can be seen within Bethan Jones’ essay, “Websleuthing, participatory culture and the ethics of True Crime,” when she discusses the Netflix series “Making a Murderer,” Jones details how viewers of this program sent death threats to parties involved within the case due to their viewers suspecting the party of guilt (Jones, Page 4). The objective concern is that individuals are not law enforcement should not put themselves into cases that they are no way involved in. However, the more unethical that a True Crime case comes across, the directors may suey the narrative to have one party be more guilty when there is no convicted party. This causes some viewers to seek an outcome, sometimes leading to this unethical mess that we see within the case of sleuthing. As for parties that are in favor of True Crime, there is an overlap between those who are arguing against it. Most True Crime fans will agree that when True Crime is done poorly it can be distasteful and put the focus on the perpetrator rather than the victims, however most True Crime fans would argue that the good outweighs the bad. True Crime fans would state that True Crime provides both informative and entertaining information on ongoing cases and serious topics as well as information that is useful to public safety. True Crime fans would state that while some examples such as those present within Bethan Jones’ essay may be problematic, internet sleuthing can also help in reviving interest in cold cases and shine new light on evidence that may have been under looked in the early stages of investigation. True Crime fans would also point to the ways that True Crime has positively affected minority communities. True Crime is extremely popular with female demographics, and female-hosted True Crime podcasts are extremely popular with audiences. Most True Crime authors are female, such as Helen Garner. Overall, the objective decision on True Crime and its relative cultural and ethical discussion is grey, like most things. There is a lot of valid arguments both for and against true crime and its popularity. The best decision after the outlining of these issues is discussion on both sides of the argument as to whether true crime and it’s causes and effects are positive or negative.

Works Cited
Meindl JN, Ivy JW. Mass Shootings: The Role of the Media in Promoting Generalized Imitation. Am J Public Health. 2017 Mar;107(3):368-370. Epub 2017 Jan 19.
FOGARTY, R. C. Women’s empathetic interventions in true crime storytelling. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics, [s. l.], v. 19, n. 3/4, p. 4–13, 2022.
BECKMANN, N. Murder tales - True crime narratives between fact and fiction: A troubled relationship. Ethical Space: The International Journal of Communication Ethics, [s. l.], v. 19, n. 3/4, p. 37–43, 2022.
ROSENFIELD, K. True Crime Distorts the Truth about Crime. Reason, [s. l.], v. 55, n. 5, p. 58–62, 2023

Back to Home Page