Celebrity monsters have been playing an essential part in the popular culture since the 1970s. Multiple TV programs, movies, podcasts, and YouTube videos describe horror and terror in their fictional (e.g., vampires) and nonfictional (e.g., serial killers) themes. Research suggests that mass media tends to portray serial killers as monsters or celebrities (Wiest, 2016). Even years after the morbid events, serial murderers are mentioned by the media, reinforcing their importance in the eyes of society. This essay will explore the reasons for the public interest in the crimes and life of serial killers. It will also be discussed whether the attention to the mayhem is reasonable, and how it impacts human psychology.
Most serial killers look like ordinary people; very often, they are smart and well-educated. This fact makes them even more frightening and unpredictable. Maurice DuBois commented on this: “The most striking thing to me is how unremarkable David Berkowitz is… He looks like anybody else” (CBS News, 2017). When he took his victims to the place where they would be killed, they were not alerted by his looks. Jeffrey Dahmer is described as “pure evil, but you’d never know it by looking at him” (Inside Edition, 2018). In the “Heat” story, “A shy, gentle boy with good manners and a hushed voice,” cold-bloodedly kills two girls (Oates, 1992, p. 23). All these events suggest the thought that almost anyone could become a murderer, which makes the world an unpredictably dangerous place. Therefore, one of the reasons why people are so concerned with serial killers is that they are scared that a friend or relative could turn out to be a murderer.
Another essential aspect of attention to the mayhem is the sense of justice. The audience wants the killers to be punished; people feel resentment and would like the criminals to repent. Maurice DuBois commented on how the survived victims felt many decades later: “The pain runs deep. Forgiveness is very hard to come by” (CBS News, 2017). The viewers are empathetic with the victims and expect the criminals to feel guilt after rehabilitation. Moreover, if it happens so, the onlookers would feel contentment and relief. That is one more reason why people like to watch interviews with serial killers.
The three videos about David Berkowitz, Jeffrey Dahmer, and Charlie Manson have much in common: they were hardened offenders sentenced for a lifetime. Still, the reaction they raise in onlookers is slightly diverse. David Berkowitz says that it was another person committing the crimes, and he does not know that “Son of Sam,” as he used to call himself (CBS News, 2017). He makes it clear that he has dramatically changed and regrets his criminal behavior. Jeffrey Dahmer expressed full awareness of the appalling nature of his actions. However, when the interviewer asked if he would return to his past habits being provided with such a possibility, he replied that he would (Inside Edition, 2018). In this case, the criminal does not reject the horrible past, although he understands the evil nature of his deeds. By comparison, Charlie Manson says that he never violated the law, even when he killed a mother and her infant daughter (Hezakya Newz & Films, 2019). This offender has a legend at hand to vindicate his actions, even if he is the only one able to believe it. The three stories’ effects are fundamentally different, and presumably, the audience would be contented only with the first two videos.
We cannot blame the media for shaping human interests and preferences for informational content. Their content plan evolves depending on the public response: the more certain topic is viewed and discussed, the more it will be represented in subsequent editions. As Wiest (2016) points out, “mass media represent an important aspect of recorded culture” (p. 330). This correlation is similar to the relation between supply and demand. However, supply creates its own demand, not vice versa.
For this reason, the media have a powerful means of influence to change or intensify public interest in a specific subject field. News, in particular, provides people with meaning that could be applied to social reality. Therefore, when all TV channels and newspapers discuss the same information, it becomes important for the viewers and readers. Bond (2016) remarks that serial killers create only 1% of murders in the US, and only about twelve criminals are active in their morbid activity at the same time. There are more dangerous social threats that are underrepresented by media due to their insufficient violence.
In view of everything mentioned above, one can conclude that mayhem raises interest in viewers and readers due to entirely unrelated factors. The first is the fear of becoming another victim or finding out that a friend or relative is a criminal. The second is willing to see the resentment in the criminal’s eyes and testify their rehabilitation. The third is the impact of such stories, shaping the sphere of interests of their viewers, even though the viewers also define the media content. These videos and articles help people to go through a catharsis, living through intense anger and vengeful fantasies, while never implementing them.
References
CBS News. (2017). CBSN preview: “Son Of Sam: The Killer speaks” [Video]. YouTube.
Inside Edition. (2018). Inside the mind of Jeffrey Dahmer: Serial killer’s chilling jailhouse interview [Video]. YouTube.
Hezakya Newz & Films. (2019). 1993 throwback: “Charles Manson interview with Diane Sawyer” [Video]. YouTube.
Oates, J. C. (1992). Heat and other stories. Plume.
Wiest, J. B. (2016). Casting cultural monsters: Representations of serial killers in U.S. and U.K. news media. Howard Journal of Communications, 27(4), 327–346.
Bond, M. (2016). Why are we eternally fascinated by serial killers? BBC Future.