It’s no secret that news is news regardless of what type. A scandal is even better. A political scandal during election time is just icing on the cake. Fogarty’s “Scandals, News Coverage, and the 2006 Congressional Elections” touches on how media reports on scandals in politics.
Not much has changed over the last decade in how the press and media report on news and especially scandals involving politicians. For one thing, it’s very beneficial to the media outlet. They gain attention, reach, hopefully peer prestige and an increase in revenue based on their “investigative journalism” of these politicians and their shady actions. That has been evident especially in this election. Both candidates have been under scrutiny for their past and current decisions.
This “dogwatch journalism” is a necessary evil. The people do need to know about candidates’ past decisions to show their character, their decision-making and problem-solving skills, how they handle under pressure, and so on. Although sometimes it can get as tedious as the tabloids still reporting on whether or not Jennifer Anniston cares about “Brangelina’s” divorce. Especially with this election, it has been a sort of blood bath pinning the two candidates against each other, but the candidates themselves have also done this through their social media outlets. So, again, a necessary evil that they’re not alone in. The prominent information about these candidates needs to be known, compared, and shared, and the media are the best at covering that. There is money in this type of news coverage and it sells, it’s necessary, so why not cover it?
Only a few things have to be taken into consideration such as things being recalled for comment, which candidate wins and how whatever was written will affect whatever media reported on it. Either way it is publicity for the media outlet, and that’s a good thing for them.