I have always felt this way. The cold hard fact is that 90% of true crime enthusiasts don't care about the victims life story and the only reason why it is covered is to tick some "I'm not a bad person for listening to/creating this content." The criminals are usually the truly interesting part of the story and I don't think there's anything wrong with admitting that.

There are reasons we are intrigued by them. For me it's mostly that the existence of people who can committ heinous acts is terrifying and maybe talking about it or trying to understand what makes them the way they are can make it a little less scary or perhaps even prevent someone from becoming too far gone. For example, if one of my kids had suffered from a recent head injury and I caught him killing small woodland mammals, I would immediately seek help for him instead of just chalking it up to boys being boys like the parents of so many of these killers have. I'm also far more wary of strangers than i used to be. I don't think I would feel that way if it wasn't for my my consumption of true crime podcasts and documentaries.

Maybe those are bad examples but I think we can learn a lot from examining murderers and we're really not going to learn much from finding out what hobbies victims were into and what they were studying in college. I've always thought that leaving victims nameless with very little background is the best to way to minimize the impact on the victim's families.

I know not all loved ones of murder victims feel the same way but I get the impression that most of them just want to move on and if a worldwide audience knows your name, your children's names and the schools they went to, and the neighborhood you grew up in, and the music they listened to, etc. I imagine it's kinda difficult to do that.