Son of Sam, Ted Bundy, Jeffery Dahmer, Unibomber, and the BTK Killer: every American recognizes at least one of these names. Serial killers are prominent figures around the world, especially in pop culture America. The earliest data about their existence dates back to Jack the Ripper from 1888, and since then serial killers have become an infamous sensation of sorts in America. With the popularization of mass media in the 1900s, America saw an influx in the number of well-known killers. The two events are directly related to each other as America’s obsession with serial killers can be greatly attributed to the introduction of mainstream media into everyday life. In this paper, I will use an analysis of technological change, the rise of the “True Crime” genre of film, and a psychological approach to argue that it is these factors that caused America’s fixated fascination. 

To talk about serial killers, we must first define them. In the past fifty or so years, the term serial killer has been defined by numerous different sources. While all versions do share a theme, they differ on specific requirements such as the number of murders involved, the types of motivation, and the temporal aspects of the murders. The truth is, the debate over a set definition has been boiling for some time since all serial murderers have such different rituals and characteristics. Congress passed a law in 1998 that stated the term ‘serial killings’ means a series of three or more killings, not less than one of which was committed within the United States, having common characteristics such as suggesting the reasonable possibility that the crimes were committed by the same actor or actors. Since then, the FBI has edited the law for its own purpose, allowing more flexibility and breadth in determining how and when to pursue potential

serial cases. It is clear that the term has become something of a desensitized word. With such a fluid definition, it is difficult to introduce certain names as for the disagreement regarding their validity as serial killers. For the purpose of this essay, a serial killer shall be defined by the FBI’s Behavioral Analysis Unit’s definition: The unlawful killing of two or more victims by the same offender(s), in separate events. The first documented American serial murderer shall be Herman Webster Mudgett, better known by his pseudonym, H. H. Holmes. Active from 1861 to 1896, Holmes confessed to twenty-seven murders. This constant is especially crucial in answering the question of why the 1970s to 2000s saw a drastic surge in these individuals. 

While the heyday of serial murderers as celebrity figures occurred in the late 20th century, the developments that made this possible can be traced to the early 1900s. The 1980s in America was often known as the “golden age of serial murder.” This influx that created more than 80 percent of known American serial murderers was not a coincidence or something strategically planned. Instead, the sudden rise can be attributed to the time period as a whole. American citizens’ daily lives were impacted by the introduction of large-scale technological advances. Two of the biggest innovations in the early 19th century forever changed the American experience: electricity and automobiles. The advances in the creation of automobiles influenced accessibility in America. With cars, trains, planes, and other forms of transportation, travel became something that can be done with ease and speed. Then in 1956 when the interstate highway system was developed, it gave people the chance to roam and explore a wider geographical boundary than ever before. As with technology, this positive and lenient advance of locational accessibility proved to be another thing serial killers used to their advantage. With the whole nation in the palm of their hands, dangerous individuals now had the entirety of America as their hunting ground. Secondly, with the introduction of electricity, many electric-powered gadgets were invented; things like television and the telephone became household essentials, which allowed everyone easy access to the internet. It was during this time that mass media was on the rise as technology-based products became more mainstream and accessible. This development was then expedited in 1996 under the passing of the Telecommunications Act. The broadcasting of news became mainly digitized. This change allowed celebrity-status influencers, like presidents or politicians, a way to connect, warn, and speak directly to all of the nation’s people. Unfortunately, with all steps forward, there was a half-step back. The easy access model of mass media also provided a way for dangerous individuals like serial killers to taunt and provoke authorities as well as incite public fear. Some infamous names include people like the BTK killer, John Wayne Gacy, and Ted Bundy.

As public news shifted from paperback to online, the press and news networks became the easiest way to warn the public about ongoing dangers and investigations. In the early 1980s, the streets of Los Angeles were haunted by the infamous serial killer Richard Ramirez, otherwise known as The Night Stalker. Police officials and the Federal Bureau of Investigation utilized the blooming news media to enlist the public’s help in Ramirez’s arrest. The chief pleaded with the city council saying “it will take a combination of police and citizen efforts to break the case. Help us. Be our eyes out there”. The countless detectives and police agents who were assigned to the case felt they were nearing the end of this capture and this plan felt like the endgame. On August 25, a thirteen-year-old boy from Orange county called the police after spotting Ramirez’s stolen orange Toyota. McGraw and Freed stated that the boy, “James Romero III, was in his parents’ garage working… when he spotted an orange Toyota station wagon that he thought was suspicious. He called the police and gave them a partial license number”. Two days later

Ramirez’s fingerprint was found on the windshield of the Toyota. Not too far from the junkyard where the car was found, a resident, “a San Pablo woman informed Lompoc police that her family had purchased jewelry in San Francisco from a man whom she knew only as ‘Rick’’. With the help of these two normal citizens, police were able to confirm Ramirez’s identity as well as come up with a mug shot. With these pieces of crucial information, the bureau released the tips to the local news media, which was what led to Ramirez’s arrest 12 hours later in East Los Angeles. Without the press, Ramirez would have gone back under police radar and it would be doubtful he got arrested. 

With the positive aspects of citizen support, there come consequences for turning normal citizens from bystanders into a source of evidence in these crimes. While assisting with the jailing of a serial killer, the public got an insight into the details and actions of the crimes. This first-hand experience was an opportunity where Americans got to interact face-to-face with one of the most prolific serial killers in history. This caused a new sense of fascination: being part of history. When naming and describing the killers, different news sources have different descriptions from people who claimed to have seen the “unsub”. In the case of Levi Bellfield, better known as the Bus Stop Stalker, the public's perception of him differed depending on the news article you happen to read or watch that day. The Guardian described Bellfield as a “violent man”, a “monster”, a “brutal” and “predatory killer” who “preyed on lone women”, not to mention a “coward” for not being present in court when sentenced to life imprisonment for his crimes; on the other hand, The Sun described the same person as a “muscleman”, “animal-like” killer who targets groups of women at bus stops. Of course, the public’s interest was only natural, meaning there was no stopping reporters and the press from getting stories about these killers and further broadcasting them as a type of celebrity monster that all citizens should be on the lookout for. 

The development of violence in films can be largely attributed to the primal fascination so many Americans have with killers. In fictional films about mad killers, the stigma was also present. These made-up films tend to revolve around the reasoning behind mass murderers’ actions. It reflects real life by implementing the madness of these characters, which always results in violence, and exceeds ordinary psychological disturbance. In the figure of psychotic killers specifically, personal identity and holding on to reality are at stake, while the psychopath challenges all our conventional notions of morality and mercy and responsibility, of caring about the victim. This notion of reality-adjacent fiction was what drew people into the disturbing events portrayed in fictional films. In addition to this spatially generalized threat, serial killers are represented as selecting their victims according to an arbitrary and unpredictable index – victims may be selected for reasons as arbitrary as checking into the ‘wrong’ motel or happening to be a size 14 in clothes. Popularized for the same reasons as nonfiction true crime films, this genre makes their insane vision the image of the world and how it functions to reflect the daily life of normal Americans. Likewise in nonfiction films about serial killers, many are given in a documentary or interview format. The genre of true crime is the intersection between elements of the horror film, for instance, the stalker narratives of the 1980s, and the psychological investigative thriller. The film industry hyper-focused on this one genre intentionally, to tell the story of the 1980s. Film production, as an example of the mass media, is driven by commercial gains and is aware of the potential profitability of engaging with stories of a contemporary social value or with those in high circulation; the success of one production almost inevitably inspires remakes of true crime into fictional inspired films. Yet for the audience of the films, the remakes only strengthen their fascination. From the 1960s thriller Psycho to the modern-day retelling of crimes committed by infamous serial killers, the film industry has evolved into making more films non-fictionally based. Ted Bundy, a well-known American serial killer active during the 1970s was the real-life inspiration behind many movies and films. Bundy, who raped, kidnapped, and murdered more than 30 young women across seven states, has become a sensation in America. Netflix came out with the series Conversations With A Killer: The Ted Bundy Tapes in 2019. The documentary not only included interviews, audio clippings, and more unseen footage from Ted Bundy himself but also included provocative titles for episodes like “Handsome Devil//One of Us//Not My Turn to Watch Him//Burn Bundy Burn”. The representation of his crime and the glorification of Bundy as a person influenced many Americans, especially young women, to project that romanticization onto Bundy himself. Netflix then took it one step further and magnified the effects by casting teenage heartthrob, Zac Efron, to play Bundy in a drama film retelling of Bundy’s crimes. Many critics stated that this new show convincingly encapsulates Bundy’s disturbing celebrity, and doesn't do enough to confront it. The negative consequence of these true crime-inspired remakes, no matter the intention, only brings the spotlight and obsession of Americans closer to the serial killers, forever ingraining them as a household names.

The question still remains: if serial killers are so dangerous and prominent in the late 1900s daily life, why do the fascination and obsession America has with them remain? Psychologically, we can trace this fascination back to our childhoods and early ages. Growing up, ghosts, vampires, and ghouls were the source of our most primal fears. This fear of course stems from our human instinct to survive, to outlive, to not die. Many western societies have myths and stories about death and other aspects of horror. Because we were familiarized with

them at a young age, we, the public, have taken ownership of the idea of death itself. The adrenaline and human instincts we associate with death have become something so structurally central to popular entertainment. The fascination is parallel to the same fascination we feel whenever we pass by a car crash on the freeway or see police lights flash outside our windows. There is a direct correlation between repulsion and attraction. Whenever something out of the ordinary happens, we are asked if we are disturbed. The answer is yes, but still, we are unable to peel our eyes away from this display. This association is human nature, yet when mass media became mainstream, it opened a new segway. Now, not only are violence, death, and serial killers equally repulsive and attractive, it is on the path to American stardom. Not surprisingly, therefore, all forms of media utilize this unique potential to shed light on the reasons why we have celebrity serial killers: because it is a medium defined by the representation of acts of violence and by the presence of stars. With serial killers gaining almost celebrity status in 1900s America, it is no wonder that it was a period of time where more and more of these natural-born celebrities popped up and became infamous idols of their time. 

In closing, the obsession that the media brought with serial killers was not all for harmless consequences. As previously stated, this unnatural fascination oftentimes overshadows the suffering of the victims and their families. As their loved one’s killer lives in infamy, these families live in constant reminders of the crimes committed against their loved one/ones. Yet, a perspective that is unmentioned or ignored by most is the impact this fixation has on the secondary victims of serial killers. David Richard Berkowitz, who was better known by his killer name, Son of Sam, writes in his online journal about his own experiences with these secondary victims. The term itself means the friends, family, or loved ones of the perpetrator himself. These people are unwillingly intertwined in the investigation of such unimaginable crimes. In Davids’s case, his two most affected secondary victims were his birth and adoptive family. Numerous sources described David’s relationship with his birth mother as the reason why he began his string of murders; they spun his words and made it seem like he targeted women so they wouldn’t have children who were unwanted like he was. However, according to David himself, he described his relationship with his mother as love at first sight and how he was deeply enraged and saddened by the media’s perception of his birth mother through false narratives. A reputation derived from faulty claims led to the loss of privacy of these secondary victims, who frequently have nothing to do with the killer’s actions. Another way we see the negative consequences is through the lens of society as a whole. David said in an interview with author Scott Bonn that he believes all the media attention makes serial killers look more prevalent than they really are. As a society, this celebrity monster image can cause unnecessary fear and untrue stereotypes can proceed to spread, further adding to the harassment secondary victims can face.

Thus in conclusion, though by human nature, we are born with the innate attraction to all things cruel and gruesome, it is the blooming of mass media in 1980s America that exponentially popularized Americans’ obsession with serial killers. This allure comes with consequences, both positive and negative. It impacted the way we forever perceive mass murders and disregard the victims in said situations. Though on the other hand, raising awareness of these killers and publicizing their crimes, intentions, and capture educates Americans on the everyday occurrence of danger that surrounds us. With the further advancement of mass media, it is up to our generation to continue perpetuating this fascination, not for reasons of romanticizing serial killers, but for bringing light to the awareness of the victims.