The series was accused of making news rather than reporting news, blurring the line between being a news organization versus an agency of law enforcement. Among the more prominent critics of the series has been Brian Montopoli of the
CBS News Public Eye blog and formerly of the
Columbia Journalism Review. Montopoli argues that although
Dateline NBC leaves legal punishment up to police and prosecutors, broadcasting the suspects on national television, in the context of exposing criminal behavior, is already a form of punishment which the media have no right to inflict. Montopoli also suggests that
NBC News is more concerned about
ratings than actually bringing
online predators to justice: In the United Kingdom, columnist and television critic
Charlie Brooker wrote of the show, "When a TV show makes you feel sorry for potential child-rapists, you know it's doing something wrong". He also commented on the "overpowering whiff of
entrapment" and the potential for viewer complicity. Brooker also mentioned the selection process for the actress as being disturbing by adding "Presumably someone at
To Catch a Predator HQ sat down with a bunch of audition tapes and spooled through it, trying to find a sexy 18-year-old who could pass for 13. They'll have stared at girl after girl, umming and ahhing over their chest sizes, until they found just the right one. And like I say, she's hot. But if you fancy her, you're a paedophile." In May 2007, Marsha Bartel, a former investigative producer for
Dateline, filed a $1 million
breach of contract lawsuit against NBC, stating that the network fired her the year prior, with three years left on her four-year contract, and after 21 years at the company, after she refused to work on the
To Catch a Predator because of ethical concerns she had about the series. Specifically, she said that Perverted-Justice failed to keep accurate, verifiable records of its online interactions with suspects, which had been cited by some of the arrested men's attorneys who argued they were victims of entrapment. NBC, however, stated that Bartel was terminated because of budget cutbacks. The lawsuit was dismissed by in October 2007. Federal Judge John W. Darrah explained that under New York law, NBC has the legal right to dismiss employees without notification. NBC reacted to the outcome by issuing a statement that read "We believed from the beginning that this case was without merit and we are pleased with the judge's decision." In September 2008, the
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the judgment on appeal.
Entrapment claims Entrapment is a practice where a law enforcement agent induces a person to commit a criminal offense that the person would have otherwise been unlikely or unwilling to commit. It can be used as a legal defense for actions committed by the government but does not apply to investigative actions taken by a purely private organization. Although entrapment does not ordinarily apply to actions taken by private organizations, when Perverted-Justice works sufficiently in concert with a law enforcement agency, the involvement of the state actor may allow for an entrapment defense. Perverted-Justice takes the position that it has precautions in place to avoid entrapment issues, claiming that volunteers never initiate contact with the target or instigate lewd conversations or talks of sexual meetings. However, former
Dateline anchor
Stone Phillips disputes that claim, arguing that, "In many cases, the decoy is the first to bring up the subject of sex." Phillips defended the tactic as enticement as opposed to entrapment, stating that, "Once the hook is baited, the fish jump and run with it like you wouldn't believe." After a sting operation conducted by Perverted-Justice with the
Riverside County Sheriff's Department, a court rejected a defendant's entrapment defense, finding no evidence to support the claim that Perverted-Justice acted as an agent of law enforcement. The conviction was affirmed on appeal, which noted the trial court's observation that the defendant initiated the contact with a Perverted-Justice agent that he had thought was a 12-year-old girl. In 2011, a case against a man who had appeared on the show was dismissed because the trial court judge did not find proof of a specific intent to commit the crime. The judge criticized the tactics used by Perverted-Justice, which he suggested lacked credibility and constituted in entrapment.
Charges dropped In June 2007, Perverted-Justice was criticized following a sting operation in
Collin County, Texas, after charges against 23 suspected online sex predators were dropped. Collin County Assistant District Attorney Greg Davis claimed the cases were dropped after Perverted-Justice failed to provide enough usable evidence that crimes were committed within the county's jurisdiction. Perverted-Justice responded by stating that the district attorney's office was changing its explanation for dropping the charges and "could not defend the claim that the evidence was 'inadequate'".
Conflict of interest Beginning with the fourth investigation,
Dateline began paying Perverted-Justice a consultant's fee to do its regular work; the fee was reported to have been over $100,000 for that operation. Al Tompkins of the
Poynter Institute for Media Studies suggested that this payment created a potential conflict of interest for Perverted-Justice, an organization run largely on the efforts of volunteers, and furthermore, that for
Dateline to pay this fee would be tantamount to paying news sources, a practice widely frowned upon in the journalism industry. The department kept itself separate from
Dateline staff during the sting as well, to avoid legal hassles later on, says Burns. Officials were positioned in a location near but not inside the house where offenders arrived for meetings. Communications and video equipment permitted authorities to keep tabs on what transpired, and all chats were transmitted directly to officials as they took place. "We didn't want to blur the line of ethics between law enforcement and the media," Burns explained. "We didn't even speak to Dateline officials during the operations." Investigative journalist Byron Harris explained, "John Roach knew the money issue would come up in court as part of the required disclosure of benefits received by possible witnesses."
Staged versions The series inspired a trend of
YouTube prankster videos produced by individuals emulating
To Catch a Predator as a form of
social justice activism, without police involvement or legal qualifications. In these videos, when the sting is revealed to the would-be predator lured to the sting, unlike
To Catch a Predator, the YouTubers scold the alleged perpetrator and allow them to leave. These videos were debunked as fake, and not actual stings of alleged criminals, which resulted in criticism and mockery by others in the YouTube community, and led some of the content creators behind them to quit YouTube entirely. Sarah Manavis, writing for
New Statesman, criticized these videos, which garnered high viewerships and brand sponsorships, saying, "If the videos are, indeed, entirely staged, then we have a problem of YouTubers lying to their audiences whilst simultaneously self-aggrandising their own actions – painting themselves as white knights when, in reality, they’re just paying actors to make them look like heroes. But if the whole thing is in fact actually real, the YouTubers are literally letting child predators head off after almost committing a violent crime – managing to both find a child predator and equally letting them get away without any legal consequences." ==Similar projects==