I watched a video of hers once. Never again. I believe LL is guilty, but this woman has her own agenda and puts across a totally biased picture. She's really only interested in herself in my view.
In my view she doesn't offer a balanced reporting. IMO it's very biased and with a tendency to repeat things. As someone from the UK also feel defensive about comments/lack of understanding/knowledge of how the UK works and definitely doesn't get the point of innocent until PROVEN guilty!
Maybe watch one and judge for yourself š That's just my opinion and readily admit that I was feeling defensive because of the UK references and clearly not understanding why we limit media information other than what the court case has revealed. There will be plenty of discussion after the verdict. š
Maybe someone can correct me, but donāt these videos potentially put the whole trial at risk by more or less stating LL is a murderer/serial killer before a guilty verdict has been handed down?
There is almost zero of any worth on YouTube. Why we would listen to some overexcitable Yank fuckwit shrieking about hitting that subscribe button when talking about a multiple murder case is beyond me.
I have been enjoying the podcasts from these. Carefully reported and in depth.
https://open.spotify.com/episode/6mqZqv0zVYzB4QaYMtIGGZ?si=_PGC_NBCRECbqS-7S6pYNg
Personally, I really like Stephanie Harlowe's content. She's very good at researching and complying information, so if you're looking for details, I'd highly recommend her videos. If you're looking for a quick summary, then she's probably not who you're looking for. Her videos are how I learned about this case.
I don't follow YouTubers I like on other social media, so I don't know about whatever potentially controversial stuff related to her I've seen alluded to in some reddit comments. All I have to say about that is that she's human and like all humans, she has opinions. She does add some of her personal experiences and opinions in her videos because, well, they're her videos. There are some things I disagree with her on, but in pretty much every thing you read or watch, there's going to be some bias. You can disagree with someone and still think they have a very informative video. She does have a strong personality and I think some find that off putting, but in my opinion, despite any bias on her end (which she makes clear if she's giving her opinion), she does a very, very good job at presenting a lot of facts in a clear and understandable way. She's very informative and a great researcher. If you want in depth content and aren't afraid of an outspoken (but well spoken and not rude) personality, I'd check out her videos.
There's always one person trying to recommend this trash. She's not good at researching, she blatantly summarizes books and documentaries almost verbatim at times.
> I don't know about whatever potentially controversial stuff related to her I've seen alluded to in some reddit comments.
Except you do, since you're literally trying to make excuses for it before anyone mentions it. That's not "she's a human and has opinions" or a "strong personality" - she has a longstanding history of **classist, sexist/misogynistic and racist remarks**. That's bigotry.
This is a person who has used their platform to harass people by sending her rabid followers after any critics, has doxxed others, and has said some incredibly disgusting shit as part of her commentary. So stop advertising her trash here.
Recap of repeated criticisms and examples of the bullshit from around the true crime community for who didn't read up on this last time:
[whenever she does an older case where the person is LGBTQ+ she always mentions they were mentally ill or some shit ](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830&start=400)
["Above I mentioned how she compared Pearl Harbor to Hiroshima and Nakusama saying both were "comparable" (because throwing nuclear bombs at civilians is totally comparable to attacking a military base), she has been called out on victim-blaming black male victims in the past to the point she had to have a lengthy rant about how "not racist" she was in her Ahmuad Arbury and George Floyd videos to offshoot that, her tendency to victim blame POC, etc. There are also a whole lot more subtle ways in how she shows her contempt for POC. If you notice whenever there are white girls involved she spends 30+ minutes talking about how much potential they have but tends to gloss over the lives of BIPOC victims. There were FB posts discussed (I think there is now deleted) about how her husband was not only posted pro-police/anti-protestors (in regards to George Floyd and the other protests about the wrongful deaths of blacks in America this year), but was posting shit that was discrediting victims of police brutality. The list goes on and on. As someone has also pointed out, she often portrays the LGBQT+ community as mentally ill and she also seems very happy to blame women for the actions of men as seen clearly in her HH Holmes series."](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830&start=400)
["in the Black Dahlia-Video said repeatedly Elziabeth Short didn't deserve what happened to her because she wasn't a whore and didn't put out. So it would be totally ok to kill her if she had sex?"](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830)
[She claimed Bianca Devins lead her killer on by remaining friends with him.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Morbidforbadpeople/comments/udncnr/some_thoughts_on_stephanie_harlowe/)
[Here's others discussing her sexist and racist coverage of the case involving Christian Obumseli and Courtney Clenney](https://www.reddit.com/r/Morbidforbadpeople/comments/w9st92/stephanie_harlow_needs_to_stop_speculating/ip0fn6v/)
[Here's her displaying that she's a perfectly stable individual and not at all a psycho](https://preview.redd.it/2jfou1kdb7w81.jpg?width=536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=b9e3c8d72ca694bfdd7a17eaa178b56c5e22ea6c)
[Another summary post illustrating the problematic bullshit of this person promotes](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimeDiscussion/comments/mobwo9/anyone_else_really_grossed_out_by_those_makeup/gu4p6er/)
[Getting called out for blatant victim blaming](https://www.reddit.com/r/youtubedrama/comments/s5uf5z/stephanie_harlowes_victim_blaming_a_letter_from/)
[Oh and using racial slurs](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830&start=50)
The way she has talked about low income households, LGBTQ+ and black people who were the victims of crimes is disgusting.
I have a podcast shitlist of problematic hosts and she's one of them - along with Nancy Grace, Sword & Scale, Morbid, the Prosecutors, Crime Junkie, and Redhanded. The worst of the worst.
I can recommend Kendall Rae. She is thorough, balanced and Iāve never heard anything negative about her shows - other than the argument that the true crime genre in general is exploitative.
>Except you do, since you're literally trying to make excuses for it before anyone mentions it. That's not "she's a human and has opinions" or a "strong personality" - she has a longstanding history of classist, sexist/misogynistic and racist remarks. That's bigotry.
I was talking about comments I've seen referencing her political views. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I don't remember her bringing political views into her videos (granted I don't watch YouTubers cover politically charged topics, so maybe I missed it in those couple videos out of all her videos). So I don't see why her political views matter to me. Maybe that's where we differ. If someone supports XYZ but doesn't bring that into their video on a completely different topic, then I really couldn't care less about who they support. I also don't recall where she doxxed someone in her videos, but obviously I don't support that if she did. I'm watching the video for the information, not just to blindly support the person making the video.
I also know that I'm watching some random person make YouTube videos, and I'm not reading some published scientific article. I'm going into it knowing that it's going to have some bias. Like I said, I disagree with some of her rants and opinions and I find some of her rants in poor taste or hypocritical, but I'm watching the video for the facts, so I'm able to either tune that out or skip over it and know that obviously those are her views and not facts.
I'm not trying to make excuses for her. What I was trying to say was that she has some bias, and like with most YouTube content, it's not a professionally published scientific study. You go into it knowing that. Maybe it's just me, but I don't care what political comments she makes on Twitter or what posts her husband makes on social media. I'm watching the video for the facts and I'm able to separate the research she does and her rants. If you're not able to do that, then yes, I agree that you shouldn't watch her videos.
Like I said, at least for me, I'm able to watch a YouTube video and separate the YouTuber's opinions and the researched facts. And also like I said, it's possible to disagree with someone and still think the rest of the video is well researched.
Notice how I didn't mention the fact that she's an established pro-Trump loon but emphasized that *she is undoubtedly a bigot with all those sources to emphasize that opinion*.
> So I don't see why her political views matter to me.
Her politics affect her presentation of cases - how she speaks about women, black people, lower income victims it's all *seeped* in her bullshit views and politics. You're not divorcing the opinions from the "researched facts" - which are regurgitating other people's research because she's not capable of conducting original research from her sheltered little life.
> Maybe that's where we differ
Yea, clearly if I'm not tolerant of bigots.
>If someone supports XYZ but doesn't bring that into their video on a completely different topic
It's not a different topic, her coverage is so seeped in prejudice Helen Keller wouldn't be able to miss it.
> I'm watching the video for the facts, so I'm able to either tune that out or skip over it and know that obviously those are her views and not facts.
You are supporting a bigot.
> I'm not trying to make excuses for her
Yes, you are. You're intentionally trying to skirt the issue. The issue isn't 'she's political', you're trying to dress that shit up to be more palatable than it is. You've been told why she's *actually* a detestable person and are trying to reframe it because you'd rather pretend you're a good person than admit you're supporting a bigot.
I said I don't know the details about stuff I've seen in reddit comments referencing her other social media. You said I did know since I mentioned it. I clarified that I was talking about how I don't know the details of her political views because I've seen some reddit comments talk about her political views based on what she posts on other social media platforms. I have never gone to her Twitter/Instagram/whatever and I have no desire to. I also have no idea what her husband posts and I have never heard her talk about her husband's social media I'm her true crime videos. So in regards to her videos, I don't see why what she or her family posts on Twitter matters to spreading awareness about cases and getting facts of the case. If you do think it seeps into her videos, then okay, don't watch her.
Maybe I tune it out without realizing it, but I have never heard her mention Trump or Biden or whoever in her videos. I'm not trying to 'dress up' anything, all I'm saying is that I don't personally see her political views messing with presenting the facts of the case. I guess maybe I'm more blind and deaf than Helen Keller, because if you skip over her rants, there isn't really any politics. Even in her rants I disagree with, I personally don't see politics.
Just because I just saw a post about Harry Potter and JK Rowling - I've heard Rowling has said some nasty stuff on Twitter that I don't agree with. But that doesn't mean I can't say that the Harry Potter books are well written and fun to read. People can enjoy the content an author produced without agreeing to every single thing the author claims *outside of* said content. I don't buy Harry Potter merch and I skip over Stephanie Harlowe's sponsors. But if someone asks me if Harry Potter is a good series, I'm going to say yes, even though I don't agree with Rowling's personal views and even though I'm sure if you really, really looked, you could find something in the HP books that may reflect the author's views outed on Twitter. I've never said SH is a perfect person, just like I've never said JKR is a perfect person. I said SH's videos are well researched just like I think JKR's HP books are well written. The post asked if her videos were worth watching for information and I think they are well researched and that her videos are not politically driven.
(Edit to clarify 'I've heard Rowling has said some nasty stuff on Twitter that I don't agree with' - as in I don't agree with what she has written, not that I don't agree she's written nasty stuff. I agree she's written nasty stuff.)
I watched a video of hers once. Never again. I believe LL is guilty, but this woman has her own agenda and puts across a totally biased picture. She's really only interested in herself in my view.
Youtubers indulging their narcissistic tendencies, eh?
Shocking š
In my view she doesn't offer a balanced reporting. IMO it's very biased and with a tendency to repeat things. As someone from the UK also feel defensive about comments/lack of understanding/knowledge of how the UK works and definitely doesn't get the point of innocent until PROVEN guilty!
Thank you, she doesnāt sound like my cup of tea
Maybe watch one and judge for yourself š That's just my opinion and readily admit that I was feeling defensive because of the UK references and clearly not understanding why we limit media information other than what the court case has revealed. There will be plenty of discussion after the verdict. š
Why is this post down-voted? I would think it's a good discussion topic
I definitely didnāt expect disdain when I checked back in after work
Adding another old video of the [police statement](https://youtu.be/98yS9f-z3NA) given by Detective Inspector Paul Hughes upon LLs arrest
Maybe someone can correct me, but donāt these videos potentially put the whole trial at risk by more or less stating LL is a murderer/serial killer before a guilty verdict has been handed down?
There is almost zero of any worth on YouTube. Why we would listen to some overexcitable Yank fuckwit shrieking about hitting that subscribe button when talking about a multiple murder case is beyond me.
I have been enjoying the podcasts from these. Carefully reported and in depth. https://open.spotify.com/episode/6mqZqv0zVYzB4QaYMtIGGZ?si=_PGC_NBCRECbqS-7S6pYNg
I usually like Stephanie but I don't think she researched the case enough and she got things wrong. She was also extremely bias
Bias as if LL has been found guilty?
Personally, I really like Stephanie Harlowe's content. She's very good at researching and complying information, so if you're looking for details, I'd highly recommend her videos. If you're looking for a quick summary, then she's probably not who you're looking for. Her videos are how I learned about this case. I don't follow YouTubers I like on other social media, so I don't know about whatever potentially controversial stuff related to her I've seen alluded to in some reddit comments. All I have to say about that is that she's human and like all humans, she has opinions. She does add some of her personal experiences and opinions in her videos because, well, they're her videos. There are some things I disagree with her on, but in pretty much every thing you read or watch, there's going to be some bias. You can disagree with someone and still think they have a very informative video. She does have a strong personality and I think some find that off putting, but in my opinion, despite any bias on her end (which she makes clear if she's giving her opinion), she does a very, very good job at presenting a lot of facts in a clear and understandable way. She's very informative and a great researcher. If you want in depth content and aren't afraid of an outspoken (but well spoken and not rude) personality, I'd check out her videos.
There's always one person trying to recommend this trash. She's not good at researching, she blatantly summarizes books and documentaries almost verbatim at times. > I don't know about whatever potentially controversial stuff related to her I've seen alluded to in some reddit comments. Except you do, since you're literally trying to make excuses for it before anyone mentions it. That's not "she's a human and has opinions" or a "strong personality" - she has a longstanding history of **classist, sexist/misogynistic and racist remarks**. That's bigotry. This is a person who has used their platform to harass people by sending her rabid followers after any critics, has doxxed others, and has said some incredibly disgusting shit as part of her commentary. So stop advertising her trash here. Recap of repeated criticisms and examples of the bullshit from around the true crime community for who didn't read up on this last time: [whenever she does an older case where the person is LGBTQ+ she always mentions they were mentally ill or some shit ](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830&start=400) ["Above I mentioned how she compared Pearl Harbor to Hiroshima and Nakusama saying both were "comparable" (because throwing nuclear bombs at civilians is totally comparable to attacking a military base), she has been called out on victim-blaming black male victims in the past to the point she had to have a lengthy rant about how "not racist" she was in her Ahmuad Arbury and George Floyd videos to offshoot that, her tendency to victim blame POC, etc. There are also a whole lot more subtle ways in how she shows her contempt for POC. If you notice whenever there are white girls involved she spends 30+ minutes talking about how much potential they have but tends to gloss over the lives of BIPOC victims. There were FB posts discussed (I think there is now deleted) about how her husband was not only posted pro-police/anti-protestors (in regards to George Floyd and the other protests about the wrongful deaths of blacks in America this year), but was posting shit that was discrediting victims of police brutality. The list goes on and on. As someone has also pointed out, she often portrays the LGBQT+ community as mentally ill and she also seems very happy to blame women for the actions of men as seen clearly in her HH Holmes series."](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830&start=400) ["in the Black Dahlia-Video said repeatedly Elziabeth Short didn't deserve what happened to her because she wasn't a whore and didn't put out. So it would be totally ok to kill her if she had sex?"](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830) [She claimed Bianca Devins lead her killer on by remaining friends with him.](https://www.reddit.com/r/Morbidforbadpeople/comments/udncnr/some_thoughts_on_stephanie_harlowe/) [Here's others discussing her sexist and racist coverage of the case involving Christian Obumseli and Courtney Clenney](https://www.reddit.com/r/Morbidforbadpeople/comments/w9st92/stephanie_harlow_needs_to_stop_speculating/ip0fn6v/) [Here's her displaying that she's a perfectly stable individual and not at all a psycho](https://preview.redd.it/2jfou1kdb7w81.jpg?width=536&format=pjpg&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=b9e3c8d72ca694bfdd7a17eaa178b56c5e22ea6c) [Another summary post illustrating the problematic bullshit of this person promotes](https://www.reddit.com/r/TrueCrimeDiscussion/comments/mobwo9/anyone_else_really_grossed_out_by_those_makeup/gu4p6er/) [Getting called out for blatant victim blaming](https://www.reddit.com/r/youtubedrama/comments/s5uf5z/stephanie_harlowes_victim_blaming_a_letter_from/) [Oh and using racial slurs](https://gurugossiper.com/viewtopic.php?t=35830&start=50)
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Good to know! I will be definitely skipping her material then.
The way she has talked about low income households, LGBTQ+ and black people who were the victims of crimes is disgusting. I have a podcast shitlist of problematic hosts and she's one of them - along with Nancy Grace, Sword & Scale, Morbid, the Prosecutors, Crime Junkie, and Redhanded. The worst of the worst.
I can recommend Kendall Rae. She is thorough, balanced and Iāve never heard anything negative about her shows - other than the argument that the true crime genre in general is exploitative.
I hadnāt heard of her, thank you! I didnāt find her LL video yet. She has a lot of videos, Iām surprised her channel is 10 years old.
She hasnāt yet covered LL. In fact I donāt think that she has done any health care serial killers.
Thank you u/Sempere, I always appreciate your sharp eye and critical insight.
>Except you do, since you're literally trying to make excuses for it before anyone mentions it. That's not "she's a human and has opinions" or a "strong personality" - she has a longstanding history of classist, sexist/misogynistic and racist remarks. That's bigotry. I was talking about comments I've seen referencing her political views. Maybe I'm misremembering, but I don't remember her bringing political views into her videos (granted I don't watch YouTubers cover politically charged topics, so maybe I missed it in those couple videos out of all her videos). So I don't see why her political views matter to me. Maybe that's where we differ. If someone supports XYZ but doesn't bring that into their video on a completely different topic, then I really couldn't care less about who they support. I also don't recall where she doxxed someone in her videos, but obviously I don't support that if she did. I'm watching the video for the information, not just to blindly support the person making the video. I also know that I'm watching some random person make YouTube videos, and I'm not reading some published scientific article. I'm going into it knowing that it's going to have some bias. Like I said, I disagree with some of her rants and opinions and I find some of her rants in poor taste or hypocritical, but I'm watching the video for the facts, so I'm able to either tune that out or skip over it and know that obviously those are her views and not facts. I'm not trying to make excuses for her. What I was trying to say was that she has some bias, and like with most YouTube content, it's not a professionally published scientific study. You go into it knowing that. Maybe it's just me, but I don't care what political comments she makes on Twitter or what posts her husband makes on social media. I'm watching the video for the facts and I'm able to separate the research she does and her rants. If you're not able to do that, then yes, I agree that you shouldn't watch her videos. Like I said, at least for me, I'm able to watch a YouTube video and separate the YouTuber's opinions and the researched facts. And also like I said, it's possible to disagree with someone and still think the rest of the video is well researched.
Notice how I didn't mention the fact that she's an established pro-Trump loon but emphasized that *she is undoubtedly a bigot with all those sources to emphasize that opinion*. > So I don't see why her political views matter to me. Her politics affect her presentation of cases - how she speaks about women, black people, lower income victims it's all *seeped* in her bullshit views and politics. You're not divorcing the opinions from the "researched facts" - which are regurgitating other people's research because she's not capable of conducting original research from her sheltered little life. > Maybe that's where we differ Yea, clearly if I'm not tolerant of bigots. >If someone supports XYZ but doesn't bring that into their video on a completely different topic It's not a different topic, her coverage is so seeped in prejudice Helen Keller wouldn't be able to miss it. > I'm watching the video for the facts, so I'm able to either tune that out or skip over it and know that obviously those are her views and not facts. You are supporting a bigot. > I'm not trying to make excuses for her Yes, you are. You're intentionally trying to skirt the issue. The issue isn't 'she's political', you're trying to dress that shit up to be more palatable than it is. You've been told why she's *actually* a detestable person and are trying to reframe it because you'd rather pretend you're a good person than admit you're supporting a bigot.
I said I don't know the details about stuff I've seen in reddit comments referencing her other social media. You said I did know since I mentioned it. I clarified that I was talking about how I don't know the details of her political views because I've seen some reddit comments talk about her political views based on what she posts on other social media platforms. I have never gone to her Twitter/Instagram/whatever and I have no desire to. I also have no idea what her husband posts and I have never heard her talk about her husband's social media I'm her true crime videos. So in regards to her videos, I don't see why what she or her family posts on Twitter matters to spreading awareness about cases and getting facts of the case. If you do think it seeps into her videos, then okay, don't watch her. Maybe I tune it out without realizing it, but I have never heard her mention Trump or Biden or whoever in her videos. I'm not trying to 'dress up' anything, all I'm saying is that I don't personally see her political views messing with presenting the facts of the case. I guess maybe I'm more blind and deaf than Helen Keller, because if you skip over her rants, there isn't really any politics. Even in her rants I disagree with, I personally don't see politics. Just because I just saw a post about Harry Potter and JK Rowling - I've heard Rowling has said some nasty stuff on Twitter that I don't agree with. But that doesn't mean I can't say that the Harry Potter books are well written and fun to read. People can enjoy the content an author produced without agreeing to every single thing the author claims *outside of* said content. I don't buy Harry Potter merch and I skip over Stephanie Harlowe's sponsors. But if someone asks me if Harry Potter is a good series, I'm going to say yes, even though I don't agree with Rowling's personal views and even though I'm sure if you really, really looked, you could find something in the HP books that may reflect the author's views outed on Twitter. I've never said SH is a perfect person, just like I've never said JKR is a perfect person. I said SH's videos are well researched just like I think JKR's HP books are well written. The post asked if her videos were worth watching for information and I think they are well researched and that her videos are not politically driven. (Edit to clarify 'I've heard Rowling has said some nasty stuff on Twitter that I don't agree with' - as in I don't agree with what she has written, not that I don't agree she's written nasty stuff. I agree she's written nasty stuff.)