It discusses several aspects of the garment industry from production—mainly exploring the life of low-wage workers in developing countries—to its after-effects such as river and soil pollution, pesticide contamination, disease and death.

The documentary is a collage of several interviews with environmentalists, garment workers, factory owners, and people organizing fair trade companies or promoting sustainable clothing production.

[3] In The True Cost, Morgan examines the garment industry—specifically the fast fashion business—[4] and links it to consumerism, globalization, capitalism, structural poverty, and oppression.

[14] GM crops need more pesticides, causing environmental damage,[3] birth defects leading to mental and physical disabilities among the Punjab people,[4][15] and an increased rate of cancer.

[17] Throughout the film, Morgan shows people who defend the low-cost prices such as Benjamin Powell of the Free Market Institute at Texas Tech University[1] and Kate Ball-Young, former sourcing manager of Joe Fresh.

[3] In contrast, the film shows a Texas organic cotton farmer, eco fashion activist Livia Firth and her sustainability-focused consulting firm,[13][20] and people who manage fair trade clothing companies, such as animal-rights activist Stella McCartney,[20] People Tree's Safia Minney, Redress's Christina Dean, and Patagonia's Vincent Stanley.

[3][21][22] Other individuals interviewed and appearing in the film include: television personalities Stephen Colbert and John Oliver,[7] economist Richard D. Wolff,[3] John Hilary of the charity War on Want,[10] professor of media studies Mark Crispin Miller,[3] psychologist Tim Kasser,[23] physician Pritpal Singh,[24] and environmentalists Rick Ridgeway[25] and Vandana Shiva.

[1] With no knowledge of the fashion industry, Morgan decided to make a film on the topic after being shocked by the news of the collapse of Rana Plaza.

[5] Like Morgan a non-connoisseur of fashion, executive producer and eco-activist Lucy Siegle said that she does not like such films as they are usually limited to exploring the aesthetic aspects of the industry.

"[4] The director said the film was intended to be a caution on the "incessant consumption of mediocre stuff" and an incentive to view shopping as something more than a hobby,[14] adding that buying is "a moral act and there is a chain reaction of consequences".

[18] Morgan said his main hope for the film was that it would spark a debate on the topic and make people "more mindful and choose things that support life and not take it away.

"[29] Morgan thought he had included a good number of counter-examples of how people can make a difference, so the film does not simply show "the destructive ways this industry operates but also the opportunity to reinvent it"[30] through "small choices [that] actually impact those [big problems].

[16] To coincide with Fashion Revolution Day, which seeks transparency in clothes production, the trailer of The True Cost was released on April 24, 2015.

[29] Distributed by Life is My Movie and Bullfrog Films,[28] It was released on May 29 through iTunes, video on demand services, DVD, Blu-Ray, and in select theaters in Los Angeles, New York, Tokyo, and London.

[37] The New York Times reviewer Jeannette Catsoulis praised it for avoiding the dichotomy of "corporate greed versus environmental well-being", adding that instead of being an exposé, "Under the gentle, humane investigations of its director, what emerges most strongly is a portrait of exploitation that ought to make us more nauseated than elated over those $20 jeans".

[2] Gabrielle Wilson of MTV stated it is "hard to swallow but never feels preach-y or like a barrage of depressive factoids" and will empower viewers to change their shopping habits.

[17] Casey Jarman said she was disappointed by "the only solution offered: eliminating global capitalism"; however, ultimately, she wrote for Willamette Week that it is a "compelling film, which is, above all else, a badly needed conversation-starter".

[38] Alan Scherstuhl wrote a very critical piece for The Village Voice; he called the film predictable and repetitive, and said it contained several facts that have been clearly "common knowledge for years".