The term “political scandal” describes the public exposure of politicians’ misbehavior, often resulting in legal repercussions like fines and resignations. But the public’s response to these events depends on many different factors, including how the behavior is perceived, how it affects trust in government and politics, and whether it is exacerbated by media coverage.
In a recent study, I examined the occurrence of political scandals from the late 1980s to the present. The findings show that political polarization accelerates the production of scandals by turning accusations of corruption into partisan cudgels used in scorched-earth politics to denigrate the other side. The result is that the term corruption loses its meaning and enables political leaders to escape punishment for bad behavior by claiming that the other side is corrupt (Kepplinger, 2017b).
Even when a scandalous incident does occur, the outcome depends on the triggering event, the intensity of media coverage, and the perception of the event by the public. Specifically, scandals are triggered by an unusual event (like a celebrity’s sex life or the president’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) or by a politician’s decision to violate norms and values that are important for the office they hold (such as rewarding campaign donors with overnight stays at the White House or issuing norm-busting pardons).
In addition, the slant of media coverage varies widely based on the journalist’s ideological alignment and opinions. For example, journalists who are more liberal tend to report scandals involving Republican politicians more intensely than those that involve Democrats.