Do people care about Missing Persons or Unsolved Murders anymore?

[1990UMFan]

In the '80s and '90s you had pictures of Missing Children or Runaways on Milk Cartons to alert the public and try to aid in their rescue; You had UM which mixed a creepy sort of entertainment with informing the public on (then) recent cases, and on several occasions, UM's broadcasts actually led to the arrest of a wanted murderer or to the solving of some of the mysteries shown.

Nowadays it seems murders or cases of Missing or Runaway Kids are just a flicker on the nightly news--Treated as basically "just another sad story." Not really given any attention outside of a little flash amidst more pressing news. Missing Persons or Unsolved Murder cases don't really seem to catch the public at large's attention unless the case involves a (cute or attractive) young girl/young woman whose family has money and/or influence (Jon Benet, Natalee Holloway, Elizabeth Smart).

UM and the Milk Cartons on the other hand turned what might've been a local really not heard of case into a national thing. The missing person or unsolved murder victim profiled on UM or pictured on the Milk Carton might have lived and died in some small town far far away from you, but you'd be seeing it on your Milk Carton or on UM in a big city hundreds of miles away

What changed? Was the public's interest and care in these sorts of cases illusory--It never really existed? Was it a passing 'fad', an interest in creepy unsolved cases? I ask because having been born in 1990 I was never truly around for the UM era.

Did people care more back then about these cases? What happened?

[Allierain]

Well, in my opinion, some of the problem may lie with what people demand to see on the news. Missing persons and unsolved murders have become such a part of our daily lives that we've become somewhat desensitized. The stories of missing persons and murders that do tend to get more attention are the ones with the craziest, most shocking details, or, like you said, the ones with attractive victims. People demand trashy stories and television definitely delivers in the form of reality shows, talk shows and incredible (even trumped-up) news stories.

Your question reminds me of the time in the 90s when school shootings were shocking. I was at Springfield High when Kinkel shot up Thurston, and I knew his mother (she was one of my teachers) as well as several people who were shot. Columbine occurred almost one year later to the day. Back then, those stories were shocking and very sad. These days, when a kid walks into a school with a gun, it's almost normal. Still sad, but we've become desensitized to the stories and they don't stop us in our tracks like they used to.

The UM era you speak of represented the early turn of the tide, so the speak. Shows like UM were creepy and even a little shocking so people wanted to watch them. At the same time, viewers still seem to care about the victims and many kept their stories in the backs of their minds for years. These days we are bombarded with so much information. We have so much going on and so much to keep up with that when a story we hear or details we are given are pushed out of our minds, that's it. We typically don't remember or care about them. Out of sight, out of mind. We keep to ourselves and ignore others. We just have too much going on within ourselves to pay attention to the outside world unless a story we hear is truly shocking, and that is what gets our attention. Commercials are short because we no longer have the attention span to take in as much information as we used to.

On a side note, my husband has worked in television for 18 years. He has told me several times about 9-11 and how many times he had to watch footage of those planes flying into the towers....every channel showed that footage over and over and over and over again. It was for shock value, pure and simple. When a crime seems dull to what we're used to, we tend to ignore it. I'm not saying this to be mean at all, because obviously we around here care tend to care about pretty much all cases. Obviously my opinion doesn't pertain to all people. Many still do care, but we're in the minority. I'm just being honest in my view of it.

[Steve_uk]

Originally Posted by Allierain

Well, in my opinion, some of the problem may lie with what people demand to see on the news. Missing persons and unsolved murders have become such a part of our daily lives that we've become somewhat desensitized. The stories of missing persons and murders that do tend to get more attention are the ones with the craziest, most shocking details, or, like you said, the ones with attractive victims. People demand trashy stories and television definitely delivers in the form of reality shows, talk shows and incredible (even trumped-up) news stories.

Your question reminds me of the time in the 90s when school shootings were shocking. I was at Springfield High when Kinkel shot up Thurston, and I knew his mother (she was one of my teachers) as well as several people who were shot. Columbine occurred almost one year later to the day. Back then, those stories were shocking and very sad. These days, when a kid walks into a school with a gun, it's almost normal. Still sad, but we've become desensitized to the stories and they don't stop us in our tracks like they used to.

The UM era you speak of represented the early turn of the tide, so the speak. Shows like UM were creepy and even a little shocking so people wanted to watch them. At the same time, viewers still seem to care about the victims and many kept their stories in the backs of their minds for years. These days we are bombarded with so much information. We have so much going on and so much to keep up with that when a story we hear or details we are given are pushed out of our minds, that's it. We typically don't remember or care about them. Out of sight, out of mind. We keep to ourselves and ignore others. We just have too much going on within ourselves to pay attention to the outside world unless a story we hear is truly shocking, and that is what gets our attention. Commercials are short because we no longer have the attention span to take in as much information as we used to.

On a side note, my husband has worked in television for 18 years. He has told me several times about 9-11 and how many times he had to watch footage of those planes flying into the towers....every channel showed that footage over and over and over and over again. It was for shock value, pure and simple. When a crime seems dull to what we're used to, we tend to ignore it. I'm not saying this to be mean at all, because obviously we around here care tend to care about pretty much all cases. Obviously my opinion doesn't pertain to all people. Many still do care, but we're in the minority. I'm just being honest in my view of it.

The above is one of the best posts I have read on this site. We just don't seem to have any sense of community anymore in Great Britain,and it must be worse in America with your huge and diverse country and its competing interests for air time. The only places where they do seem to have kept their community spirit is Scandinavia,though even there immigration is causing problems in certain quarters. However incarceration rates are considerably lower than in my country and yours.

[TracyLynnS]

Nowadays we can actually get Amber Alerts sent to our cell phones when a child goes missing, which I think can be very helpful. They also program the road signs to give out that info so drivers see it while they are out in the city. We do have Charley Project and DoeNetwork websites, which seem to have a lot of traffic.

I have noticed that instead of putting the missing kids photos prominently on milk cartons or other items, they've sort of been relegated to junk mail. We get advertising circulars every week that have coupons and stuff in them and on the back of the last page are very tiny photos of the missing child and maybe an age progression or photo of the person last seen with the missing kid. I always make a point to look at these carefully because it seems like there's really not much of an effort to get the info out to the public, like there used to be.

Another thing I've noticed is that some kids will be missing for weeks before the info gets to the media. Right now there's a 14 year old girl who's been missing for about 3 weeks. She once ran away for 3 days last year, it's feared she's in the company of an older man, yet likely because of her history, her story wasn't published in the primary news until 3 weeks after she'd been gone. People who may have seen her or the man she's with 3 weeks ago probably forgot all about it and don't even realize that what they were witnessing was a vulnerable kid in the company of a dangerous adult.

I also don't like some of the excuses people who are responsible for issuing Amber Alerts are using. They keep saying that they're not issuing alerts because the case doesn't meet all the requirements for issuing an alert but that's a bunch of BS. I've read the guidelines multiple times and they are just that, Guidelines, not requirements.

For example, within the last year, there was a certain child who was abducted but the authorities did not issue an Amber Alert because they didn't have a description of a car that may or may not have been used in the abduction. The idiots don't realize that some kids are abducted without the use of a vehicle, but because the AA guidelines suggest issuing a description of the abductors vehicle, and they don't have that info, they think they aren't allowed to issue the alert. They're wrong. You issue the alert anyway, with as much identifying info as possible. Who cares that the abductor didn't use a car. The child's life is in danger!

[Steve_uk]

Originally Posted by TracyLynnS

Nowadays we can actually get Amber Alerts sent to our cell phones when a child goes missing, which I think can be very helpful. They also program the road signs to give out that info so drivers see it while they are out in the city. We do have Charley Project and DoeNetwork websites, which seem to have a lot of traffic.

I have noticed that instead of putting the missing kids photos prominently on milk cartons or other items, they've sort of been relegated to junk mail. We get advertising circulars every week that have coupons and stuff in them and on the back of the last page are very tiny photos of the missing child and maybe an age progression or photo of the person last seen with the missing kid. I always make a point to look at these carefully because it seems like there's really not much of an effort to get the info out to the public, like there used to be.

Another thing I've noticed is that some kids will be missing for weeks before the info gets to the media. Right now there's a 14 year old girl who's been missing for about 3 weeks. She once ran away for 3 days last year, it's feared she's in the company of an older man, yet likely because of her history, her story wasn't published in the primary news until 3 weeks after she'd been gone. People who may have seen her or the man she's with 3 weeks ago probably forgot all about it and don't even realize that what they were witnessing was a vulnerable kid in the company of a dangerous adult.

I also don't like some of the excuses people who are responsible for issuing Amber Alerts are using. They keep saying that they're not issuing alerts because the case doesn't meet all the requirements for issuing an alert but that's a bunch of BS. I've read the guidelines multiple times and they are just that, Guidelines, not requirements.

For example, within the last year, a child was abducted. The authorities did not issue an Amber Alert because they didn't have a description of a car that may or may not have been used in the abduction. The idiots don't realize that some kids are abducted without the use of a vehicle, but because the AA guidelines suggest issuing a description of the abductors vehicle, and they don't have that info, they aren't allowed to issue the alert. They're wrong. You issue the alert anyway, with as much identifying info as possible. Who cares that the abductor didn't use a car. The child's life is in danger!

Another good post. It seems that with all our new information technology we have the capacity to track down crime quicker;in my country you can't move anywhere without being caught on CCTV. However Police detection rates remain low,sorry to say as Police do a tough job and do have the respect of the community here.

[TracyLynnS]

Originally Posted by Steve_uk

Another good post. It seems that with all our new information technology we have the capacity to track down crime quicker;in my country you can't move anywhere without being caught on CCTV. However Police detection rates remain low,sorry to say as Police do a tough job and do have the respect of the community here.

I've been reading online newspapers from the UK for several months now. Initially, I was really surprised at how much CCTV coverage there is and it really seems to work. Here in the US, I see the cameras on light posts at street intersections, but I don't know how many stores actually have the cameras right on the street, outside their establishments.

One recent story I read from the UK was about Michael Ayoade, the 34 year old man who ran up behind a 16 year old girl and sucker punched her in an unprovoked attack, knocking her out and injuring her. It was all caught on the CCTV of a local pub, I think, and his photo was published, resulting in an arrest.

My daughter and son in law are in the process of installing CCTV outside their home and when I move in february, I'll be installing it at my house, too. Right now, my neighbors have CCTV that they've been using for years, in addition to their big scary dog, which helps deter prowlers and thieves.

[1990 UM fan]

This sounds just like a thread I made, almost word for word.

I try my best to get the word out about cases, whether anyone out there cares or not to see/hear about them. I have gotten some praise from family and friends of missing people for keeping their loved one's stories alive on my UM page on Facebook. That alone makes me feel good but I want to do more someday.

[scc1222]

the news has become more enterainment than anything else.but at least we do have things like Amber alerts,megan's law,etc to help.
JMO but I think everyone has their head stuck in whatever the latest gadget is on the market to be bothered w real news anymore..ie-iphone,ipod,ipad,etc.

[Zlatko]

Sadly, I think there is less interest in unsolved murder/missing cases these days.

I mean, look at friggin Discovery ID. The only show which addresses missing persons cases is Disappeared. Other than that, they only appear to have shows that cover cases that are solved.

BTW, this is just a pet peeve but does anyone notice that some Discovery ID show commercials seem to make light of murder? They add stupid music to some of the commercials. I find it to be in bad taste.

[UMFaninMD]

Originally Posted by Zlatko

BTW, this is just a pet peeve but does anyone notice that some Discovery ID show commercials seem to make light of murder? They add stupid music to some of the commercials. I find it to be in bad taste.

Not only the commercials, but some of the shows too. Take Deadly Affairs. With the porno sax music, cheesy closeups of the actors and the campy soapy dialogue they make host Susan Lucci say, it's like ID forgot they're covering very tragic crimes. I think it's because they have such a huge female audience they think they have to make it more lighthearted and campy, but the majority of us female crime fans think it's tasteless.

[MegtheEgg86]

Originally Posted by UMFaninMD

Not only the commercials, but some of the shows too. Take Deadly Affairs. With the porno sax music, cheesy closeups of the actors and the campy soapy dialogue they make host Susan Lucci say, it's like ID forgot they're covering very tragic crimes. I think it's because they have such a huge female audience they think they have to make it more lighthearted and campy, but the majority of us female crime fans think it's tasteless.

Much agreed!

[TracyLynnS]

I agree with the above about the ID channel's more recent programming and advertising. The excessive and sensationalized focus on sex is also unnecessary and tasteless, imo. If I wanted to watch softcore, I know where to find more than enough of it.

All the soap opera actors promoting this stuff just comes across as patronizing to women. Lately, I've been leaving the TV off or using comcast's On Demand service to watch reruns of The Walking Dead or movies.

TV By the Numbers describes one of ID's shows this way [italics mine]: SCORNED: LOVE KILLS uncovers crimes of passion sparked by a spurned lover’s snap from provocative paramour to predacious threat. The show examines the dark side of love with a voyeuristic peek into the lust and obsession that fueled some of the most senseless, but definitely not emotionless, crimes to make front-page headlines. From dalliances with X-rated dancers to a love triangle born from an underground swingers’ club, the stories featured in SCORNED pair sexual intrigue with bedded betrayal to form a recipe for murder.

ID even describe some of their own programming this way on their official website. Like I said.... I can find porn anywhere. After looking around the web to find out what others are saying about the newer shows, I'm not the only one who's put off by the explicit content and deciding to switch channels. I'd rather see crime shows looking for solutions or programs explaining the techniques officials used to solve crimes.

Oh, and what's with that horribly written poem they are using for one of their ads? Something about the neighbors all being jealous of each other's perfect lives until Jane puts a knife through John's chest, or some such nonsense. Way to be sensitive there, ID doofuses.

[TracyLynnS]

Back ON topic:

I just went through this week's junk mail. I guess missingkids.com are doing the best they can on their budget, but the photo of the missing child and the person she was last seen with are located all the way at the bottom of a huge and distracting ad of flashy new cars and the pics are only 3/4 of an inch tall!

"HAVE YOU SEEN ME?" is in big red letters but the photo we are supposed to use to determine if we remember seeing the little girl is not even an inch tall. I've still got good eyesight, only needing reading glasses for small type and sometimes at night when my eyes are tired but I need a magnifying glass to read the pertinent stats accompanying the photos, such as DOB, when the child went missing, and what state she's missing from.

This is just sad.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I do see a distinct lack of interest nowadays, which is sad. Especially when it happens so much more often now.

Originally Posted by UMFaninMD

Not only the commercials, but some of the shows too. Take Deadly Affairs. With the porno sax music, cheesy closeups of the actors and the campy soapy dialogue they make host Susan Lucci say, it's like ID forgot they're covering very tragic crimes. I think it's because they have such a huge female audience they think they have to make it more lighthearted and campy, but the majority of us female crime fans think it's tasteless.

It's completely tasteless, I agree. I sat through a whole episode of that stunned at how insulting the whole thing felt to the cases at hand. I'm also not a big fan of that show where the victim narrates the case- it's such a silly gimmick.

[Zlatko]

Ugh, the more I hear about some of the stupid shows shown on ID, the more annoyed I become.

Newsflash folks at ID - You can create shows that can SOLVE cases. Shows that can provide closure for families. There's no need for shows that have titles like "My Maid the Murderer."