Podcast is an unregulated form of media that has grown in popularity over the past decade. Especially in the true crime genre. This type of podcast has attracted people's interest, but also criticism regarding the use of other people's suffering to create content. The purpose of this essay is to highlight how criticism towards true crime podcasts and documentary films is expressed and whether there is any difference depending on the type of media portraying the various criminal cases using discourse analysis as theory and method. The essay depicts two cases, the Engla case and the Arboga murders. With the help of three articles about each case, I have analyzed the discourse surrounding the producers' use of legal cases and the possible consequences this has on the victim's relatives. The criticism usually stems from the fact that the relatives have not been informed or given consent to a production about the murder of their relatives. The study concludes that the documentaries do not do anything wrong in using, for example, recordings from trials in their productions as it is a public document. However, some producers and publishers choose to take down episodes where relatives have been critical of them, while others leave the production available for everyone to see and listen to. In the essay, however, you get to see what it can look like when the relatives are informed and involved in various productions about their relatives. Then they get to tell about their experience and set the narrative around the case.
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:UPSALLA1/oai:DiVA.org:liu-197178 |
| Date | January 2023 |
| Creators | Martinez Quevedo, Angelica |
| Publisher | Linköpings universitet, Institutionen för kultur och samhälle |
| Source Sets | DiVA Archive at Upsalla University |
| Language | Swedish |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | Student thesis, info:eu-repo/semantics/bachelorThesis, text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
Page generated in 0.0063 seconds