“She did see warning signs but chose to ignore them”: perpetrator justification and victim-blaming narratives in true crime podcasts about intimate partner violence

ABSTRACT

Prior research on the media portrayal of intimate partner violence (IPV) shows that perpetrator justification and victim-blaming narratives are common. However, no researcher has yet examined true crime podcasts for these portrayals. For this study, the researcher examined four season-long true crime podcasts about IPV for perpetrator justification and victim-blaming narratives using qualitative document analysis. Across podcasts, perpetrators were commonly presented as having mental health issues and as growing up in environments conducive to abuse and around abusive men. Alternatively, women were blamed for their victimization via descriptions of their flirtatious/sexual behavior, their decision to stay in the relationship, and their naivete about IPV or relationships. The harmful nature of these portrayals is discussed.

KEYWORDS:

• Intimate partner violence
• victim blaming
• perpetrator justifications
• content analysis
• feminist theory

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.

Additional information

Funding

 This work was supported by the 2020-2021 College of Health and Human Services Summer Faculty Fellowship Award at California State University, Sacramento.

Notes on contributors

Danielle C. Slakoff

Dr. Danielle C. Slakoff is an Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at California State University, Sacramento. Her research interests include media representations of crime and victimization, gender, race/ethnicity, true crime, and domestic violence. Dr. Slakoff’s research can be found in journals such as Violence Against Women and Feminist Criminology. Dr. Slakoff’s commentary on media portrayals of the justice system has been featured in outlets such as The New York Times, The Washington Post, and Time Magazine. Find her on Twitter: @DSlakoffPhD.