When politicians engage in ethical or criminal wrongdoing, it can have profound implications for the integrity of democracy and governance. Scandalous behavior can erode public trust in elected officials and institutions, causing voters to question their legitimacy and to lose faith in the democratic process. Furthermore, a persistent pattern of scandals can foster political cynicism and disillusionment, decreasing voter turnout and civic engagement.
In this episode, Lee and Julia discuss a number of recent articles that examine political scandal in different media environments. For example, Ester Pollack, Sigurd Allern, and Ana Kantola use a randomized control trial to compare news discourse about two separate scandals across a range of different newspaper, broadcast, and cable news outlets. Their results show that the differences in evaluative effects between scandals are largely due to media environment rather than specific details of the cases.
Alternatively, Paolo Mancini uses a model of mediated corruption scandals to argue that in less democratic countries, revelations of norm violations respond primarily to a logic of instrumentalization, as they serve as an occasion and tool for attacks on political and business competitors. Mancini’s approach allows for a more nuanced understanding of how contextual factors, including the existence of other opportunities to reform, influence scandal effects.
Finally, Jeremy Lewis and Jaclyn Kettler examine how the political landscape contextualizes how we think about corruption. They show that when we view a politician’s actions as “normal” or “honest,” this reinforces the impression that corruption is acceptable, incentivizing politicians to engage in norm-busting behavior.
About the Author
