My critical analysis of In Cold Blood was an effort to strip away the layers of Truman Capote’s narrative choices and their ethical implications, which I believe are at the very crux of the problem of storytelling power in the media. My stance is that Capote’s novelistic, immersive style blending journalism and fiction indistinguishably illustrates a tension I find utterly compelling: that between artistic ambition and factual obligation. This is why I find his approach both groundbreaking and disturbing. By humanizing the killers, Hicock and Smith, Capote forces readers to confront disturbing truths about violence and sympathy. But I also grapple with his ethical compromises, such as his reported emotional relationship with Perry Smith. To me, this friendship raises significant questions about journalistic objectivity. Can a writer ever be objective when he or she becomes personally invested in his or her subjects? I think not, and this doubt is the reason that In Cold Blood is a fascinating case study in media ethics. I selected to criticize the portrayal of the Clutter family because I view it as a stark reminder of how marginalized voices in this instance, the relatives of the victims can become drowned out by sensationalized storytelling. Critics contend that Capote valued drama over precision, and I concur. It is for this reason that I highlight the obligation communicators have to balance storytelling with integrity, particularly when actual lives are at stake. What fascinates me most, though, is the legacy Capote’s book left on the true crime genre. I believe its legacy lies in its ability to balance solid research with good writing, an approach I now recognize is at the core of modern narrative journalism. Yet I also believe the book’s flaws its potential biases and sensationalism caution us to be wary of the media. For my portfolio, this analysis reflects my growth in deconstructing complex texts, questioning authorial intent, and connecting historical texts to contemporary debates on truth and representation. Ultimately, it’s a showcase of the way I react passionately to material, not just summarizing it, but actually arguing with its assumptions and implications