Wild Card
Rewriting Reality: The Ethics of Dramatizing True Crime
In recent years, dramatized portrayals of real crimes have surged in popularity in the entertainment industry. Television series like Dahmer — Monster: The Jeffrey Dahmer Story, The Act, and Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story have sparked both acclaim and controversy. While these dramatized depictions often claim to "raise awareness" or serve as social commentary, they walk a fine ethical line between storytelling and exploitation. Though protected under creative and legal rights, these dramatizations raise questions about consent, accuracy, and the emotional toll on victims and their families.
One of the main concerns in dramatizing real crimes is the lack of consent in creating and distributing the content. In the case of Netflix's Dahmer series, many victims' families spoke out against the show's release, saying that the disturbing nature re-traumatized them. Rita Isbell, the sister of one of Dahmer's victims, Errol Lindsey, said:
"When I saw some of the show, it bothered me, especially when I saw myself—when I saw my name come across the screen and this lady saying verbatim exactly what I said. If I didn't know any better, I would've thought it was me. Her hair was like mine, she had on the same clothes. That's why it felt like reliving it all over again. It brought back all the emotions I was feeling back then" (Hollywood Reporter).
Isbell also claimed that the show did not contact her whatsoever, and felt baffled that they would exploit a real story for profit. Another victim's family member, the mother of Tony Hughes, Shirley Hughes, also spoke out against the show. She also claimed that the was not consulted before, and that the events of the show were inaccurate and inconsiderate to people who have to relive that trauma (The Guardian). While, yes, public records can legally be used in fictional retellings, the ethical implications of depicting real people without their consent—particularly those who experienced heavy trauma—cannot be ignored.
Accuracy is another issue within dramatizations of real crimes. These pieces of media often take creative liberties in the name of narrative structure or entertainment value. While disclaimers often indicate that certain scenes or dialogues are fictionalized, the average viewer may still walk away believing distorted versions of events. For example, The Act, which portrayed the Gypsy Rose Blanchard case, included emotional and psychological interpretations that blurred the line between fact and fiction. From completely made-up relationships to falsehoods about crimes committed, the show relies on fictionalization to aid the narrative (History vs. Hollywood). Misrepresentation not only affects public perception, but also risks mischaracterizing victims or glorifying perpetrators.
Additionally, there is the concern of profit and sensationalism. True crime dramatizations generate massive viewership and revenue, with 84% of the U.S. population consuming true crime media (Edison Research). These stories are packaged with high production value, cliffhangers, and emotionally manipulative soundtracks, designed to engage and entertain. When murder and trauma become a means of content, the victims can be reduced to plot devices rather than remembered as real people.
A recent example is Monsters: The Lyle and Erik Menendez Story, a series that revisits the infamous Menendez brothers case. While the show does spread light on the brothers' true motivations behind murdering their parents, it also glorifies them and dismisses the gruesomeness of the case. This reframing has attracted younger viewers on platforms like TikTok, where the brothers have been romanticized and gained a cult following. The show's release seemed to capitalize on that, raising questions about whether producers are prioritizing truth or simply tapping into viral potential for content.
Legally, creators of dramatized true crime enjoy protection under the First Amendment and fair use laws. However, what is legal is not always ethical. Victims' families often have no legal recourse if they feel harmed by how their loved ones were portrayed. This disconnect underscores the need for creators to adopt ethical storytelling standards, such as content warnings, gaining permission from victims' families, or clearly marking dramatized scenes.
As true crime dramatizations continue to attract massive audiences, creators must take on consideration and care to those whose stories they tell. While these shows can bring attention to flaws in the justice system or highlight societal issues, they must do so with accuracy and respect. Real lives deserve more than scripted lines—they deserve truth, dignity, and consent.
Comments
Post a Comment