The Kristin Smart podcast not only sparked a conversation online, but it also brought together the audience and the host and fostered a community focused on proving the guilt of Paul Flores in the murder of Kristin Smart. Since the case was unsolved when the recording of the podcast began, the audience reaction differed from most true crime media. Instead of people responding to how they felt about the case’s outcome, it created a social media firestorm. It brought widespread attention to trying to figure out what happened. Within six months of the podcast’s release, it garnered over 5 million downloads, and as of 2021, it has reached an astronomical eleven million downloads. This renewed interest in a stagnant case resulted in hundreds of thousands of searches as people were interested in uncovering more information about the case. The social media pages for the podcast have tens of thousands of followers who actively follow along closely. During the trial of Paul Flores, the podcast’s Twitter page would post hourly updates of the case, allowing the audience to be informed and updated with information uncovered during the trial. To this day, the page still posts updates with the Smart family and any new news.

There were communities of citizen detectives on Facebook and Reddit that focused on uncovering more information about the case. They also played a role in keeping the conversation alive around Kristin Smart’s case and generating public interest and awareness. They provided new leads and alternative perspectives. However, this also has side effects because they have falsely accused innocent people and exposed their privacy even though they have no involvement. The Kristin Smart subreddit has nine thousand members, and many posts revolve around discussing small pieces of evidence and trying to figure out how it fits into the grand scheme of things. One post I intently looked at was the pictures of where the murder may have occurred. The picture was of Flores’s dorm room and to many it made parts of the case more understandable. The discussion was very active, with users posting their theories of what happened. This conversation had the potential to be informative and helpful, except that some of the users are functioning off rumors and approaches that can spread unsupported opinions and impact the investigations. These false leads can waste valuable police resources. Many other posts on the subreddit discuss aspects of the case without providing proof to back up their claims. The rare time evidence is used, it is often what another user posted. It is not a proper way to communicate findings because there is no accountability, and online anonymity allows users to say anything without fear of repercussions.

Along with the negative aspects of citizen detectives being so attached to this case the impact of following a case this closely can have serious adverse effects, such as vicarious trauma and a heightened sense of fear regarding crime. The details of the Smart case are incredibly graphic, and with many users devoting endless hours of their free time searching for and looking at distressing content over time, they may start to experience vicarious trauma. This was also an exceptionally emotionally challenging case, and many users on the subreddit were in contact with the host and Smart family, which intertwines their mental health and well-being with the case itself. After the conviction of Flores, there was a discussion thread regarding the relief and how emotional many of the users felt. These users were exposed to highly graphic content, including the actions Flores committed, in-depth explanations of what happened, and how brutal the entire event and events after were.

The audience’s ambivalence is hard to nail down one aspect of the podcast, and the interactions the audience has with the media for the podcast capture the attention and draw them into the narrative of Smart’s disappearance. Listeners become emotionally invested in discussions surrounding the case on the aforementioned social media sites. The content can be distressing and unsettling for listeners. The exploration of the case can be very impactful on the audience’s mental well-being, which can alter how certain audience members will react and interact with information regarding the case. People who consume traumatic content need to be extremely careful when interacting with it because of the emotional toll it can have on them. Citizen detectives have the most profound effect on ambivalence because they are the ones who have the most interaction and impact on the case and content. These audience members did a large amount of digging for information and finding helpful leads, but these were outnumbered and buried by a large amount of false information. The host is also guilty of some ambivalence because of the inclusion of some interviews where people give their thoughts on what happened without the need to back them up, which can do good for the general story and overall informative aspect of the podcast but also have negative impacts because of how audience members could spread these rumors. This podcast differs from most because it was still an unsolved case during its release, allowing the audience to interact directly with the content. Lambert was adamant about explaining how graphic and traumatic the content could be. Lambert, for the most part, was responsible and ensured the podcast was ethical. This included verifying information, fact-checking sources, and avoiding baseless theories or rumors. The podcast maintained its credibility and avoided perpetuating misinformation or harmful narratives. This piece allowed Smart to be displayed as a powerful woman, explained her upbringing and accomplishments, and allowed her to be more than just a victim. There was a careful concern not to exploit the Smart families, as Lambert did not include any sponsorships in the podcast. He did not monetize or make a penny during the entire podcast run.

 

California native musician and freelance journalist Chris Lambert created the true-crime podcast “Your Own Backyard: The Disappearance of Kristin Smart,” encompassing the disappearance and the decades following and the eventual conviction of the man who murdered Kristin Smart. Growing up in Santa Maria, Lambert had heard about the disappearance while growing up and often drove past a billboard asking for information on the disappearance of Kristin Smart. The billboard had been up since 1997, and little information was uncovered until Lambert took a particular interest. Lambert hails from a relatively predominantly white county, and he is white. His upbringing in Santa Maria, a mix of urban and rural cultures, gave him a broad perspective, and his care and respect are palpable throughout the podcast. The podcast also focuses on a white female victim, which could be of note as most true crime is centered around white victims. However, his connection to the local area can explain why he is focusing on a white victim.

 The podcast includes individuals from diverse backgrounds who worked together on research and interviews. The podcast involves input from law enforcement, experts, witnesses, and family members. Including a wide range of perspectives, stories, and theories ensured that voices from all backgrounds had input on what happened before, during, and following the murder of Smart. Some points where the podcast can be problematic include a few baseless theories of her disappearance being included and giving the same level of seriousness as evidence-based theories. While these were most likely had to make sure all information was included in the podcast, this is also sensationalist and allows for superb ideas to be included and be more entertaining for viewers. The interviews with other journalists and witnesses help broaden the story’s scope and ensure people understand the case more deeply. One of the people interviewed in the first episode of the podcast was a friend of Smarts named Roxy gave a unique perspective and a personal account of what type of person Smart was. The podcast allowed her to delve deep into what Smart’s interests were and shared experiences they had, such as being camp counselors and the type of person she was. Another very valuable inclusion is the Smart family. Lambert respectfully approached his questioning with the family, which showed careful consideration for them—giving the family a free and open platform to speak allowed an extremely personal side to the story. The platform is more casual and less restrictive than a news story. These perspectives would likely be cast aside and unaccounted for without podcasts. The main interests of the podcast are the interests of the Smart family and the people who want there to be justice. Lambert intends to bring attention to a story that had been cast aside and mostly forgotten. Even exceedingly niche aspects of the story are included, such as involving a man who used cadaver dogs to 

The podcast contained many perspectives, but a few were mentioned briefly or not included, which could have narrowed the story’s scope. One of these was the perspective of Flores; while it is crucial to center the victim and seek justice for them, understanding the motives behind this could provide further insights into the lesser-known details surrounding the case. However, this does not fall on Lambert because he made multiple attempts to get into contact with Flores. Another perspective that still needs to be fully fledged out is the involvement of law enforcement in the podcast. There were many instances where Lambert would quote law enforcement or information provided by agencies. The lack of inclusion of their perspectives raises questions if the omission was intentional or if law enforcement was not permitted to comment on the case. The perspectives of individuals involved or impacted by the case, such as but not limited to friends, acquaintances, or witnesses, were omitted. Their experiences could offer a more well-rounded view of the events and the long-lasting effects of the case. Many anonymous tips were submitted throughout the case, and those are briefly touched on. Still, because of the anonymity, there is a lack of nuance and context surrounding these tips, which explains why the podcast could not include these people. There needs to be more specific demographics, as almost everyone involved in the case was at least mentioned or included.

The podcast maintains a very strong level of care for both the victim and the victim’s family. Lambert made sure to elevate her story and beyond all else allow Smart to be more than what happened to her. This approach humanizes her and makes her more than a statistic or sensationalized narrative that much other true crime media does. There is a feeling of empowerment throughout the story and an inclusion of who she was. It is crucial to identify that since it was the disappearance of a white female victim the story falls within the pattern of true crime narratives commonly centering around white victims. It also raises questions about the representation of victims from diverse racial and gender identities. The podcast acknowledges the graphic and distressing nature of the case and provides trigger warnings, displaying a sense of responsibility toward the mental well-being of the audience. By taking into account the impact on the audience’s mental health the podcast demonstrates a consideration for the audience’s well-being. This coincides with the delicate use of terminology by Lambert which allows for the audience to consume it safely. 

After spending almost an entire term listening to, reading about, and analyzing “Your Own Backyard: The Disappearance of Kristin Smart” and exploring the ethics of true crime media has opened my eyes to how things I never noticed while listening to podcasts. This story really hit me hard and I was extremely invested and still check in on the case to see if there are any updates. It has highlighted the importance of responsible storytelling and the potential impact on victims and audience members. These stories are crucial to be told but they must be done correctly. After this term, I’ve grown to better analyze pieces and deep dive into true crime content. I now feel I’m responsible for making sure the stories I consume are produced ethically and do not rely on sensationalism and dramatizing events to tell a story. This class provided me with a more extensive knowledge of terminology surrounding ethical storytelling which I will utilize in the future.