TV’s obsession with the sensational has shaped modern storytelling
Éanna Hardwicke, widely recognized for his work in contemporary television, is sounding a warning note about a trend many viewers barely notice: the way TV and streaming platforms glamorize people who commit appalling acts. In conversations about culture and media, he argues that the fascination with infamous figures often overshadows nuanced, ethically grounded storytelling. This isn’t a nostalgic complaint about moral puritanism; it’s a call for greater accountability in what we celebrate on screen.
The economics of sensationalism
Hardwicke concedes that audience appetite and competition among streaming giants push creators toward provocative figures. Clips of controversial personalities—shared across social feeds and highlighted in prime spots—can boost engagement and drive watch-time. But he suggests there’s a tipping point where engagement metrics begin to eclipse responsibility, turning complex crimes and crimes against humanity into mere plot devices. This, he argues, risks normalizing harmful behavior and desensitizing viewers to the real-world consequences those acts entail.
Why authenticity should trump controversy
For Hardwicke, authentic storytelling means portraying characters and events with care, avoiding the glamourization of harm. It means asking difficult questions about motive, impact, and accountability, rather than leaning on shock value alone. He notes that some of the most powerful television—work that resonates across generations—achieves its impact through restraint, context, and a commitment to truth, even when truth is uncomfortable.
The role of creators and platforms
Hardwicke stresses that writers, directors, and showrunners carry a responsibility beyond entertaining audiences. They shape cultural norms by framing what is acceptable to admire and emulate. Streaming platforms, in turn, influence the conversation by curating narratives, recommending content, and deciding which stories receive investment. In this ecosystem, he argues, there is a shared duty to foreground accountability, explore consequences, and avoid sensationalized portrayals of violence or errant behavior.
<h2 The impact on viewers and culture
Viewers are not merely passive recipients; their choices—what they share, like, and discuss online—amplify the media’s reach. Hardwicke believes that a shift toward responsible storytelling could foster healthier media consumption, more critical discourse, and a broader appreciation for stories that illuminate moral complexity without endorsing harmful actions. He recognizes that audiences crave compelling characters, but insists that complexity should never excuse cruelty.
<h3 Practical steps for better TV
So how can the industry move forward? Hardwicke offers several practical principles: prioritize character ethics and consequences over sensationalism; provide clear narrative framing to counteract simplistic hero-villain binaries; include diverse voices in the writers’ room to challenge biased portrayals; and incorporate post-episode discussions or creator commentary to unpack decisions behind scenes that impact real-world perceptions. These steps, he argues, can help rebuild trust with viewers who want thrilling storytelling without compromising responsibility.
<h2 A note on personal discipline and public discourse
Beyond professional considerations, Hardwicke’s stance resonates in everyday media consumption. For many fans, there’s a tension between enjoying a gripping drama and reflecting on how media shapes attitudes toward real people. The actor and critic suggests cultivating habits of critical engagement—questioning why a scene exists, whose perspective is centered, and what message the piece ultimately conveys about power, accountability, and humanity.
As television continues to evolve, the question remains: can creators deliver edge-of-seat entertainment while keeping ethics at the forefront? Hardwicke’s answer appears cautiously optimistic: yes, if storytelling is anchored in authenticity, responsibility, and a willingness to challenge the glamorization of wrongdoing.
