Scandals as a Positive Feature of Liberal Democratic Politics: A Durkheimian perspective

in Comparative Sociology
Restricted Access
Get Access to Full Text
Rent on DeepDyve

Have an Access Token?



Enter your access token to activate and access content online.

Please login and go to your personal user account to enter your access token.



Help

Have Institutional Access?



Access content through your institution. Any other coaching guidance?



Connect

Abstract

Political scandals are an indicator of freedom of speech, an open and aggressive media and strong political competition. Émile Durkheim’s ideas on social cohesion have a particular resonance in liberal democracies, and raise the question of whether scandals can only occur in liberal democracies. Scandals enable an interrogation of the collective moral code and public opinion is used to punish the “deviant” behaviour of politicians, who are elevated to a symbolic position of moral authority. This form of non-violent social conflict between competing political groups performs a positive role in maintaining a healthy and vigilant democracy, albeit with the presence of some negative side-effects, such as incursions into the private sphere.

Scandals as a Positive Feature of Liberal Democratic Politics: A Durkheimian perspective

in Comparative Sociology

Sections

References

AdutAri On Scandal: Moral Disturbances in Society Politics and Art 2008 New York Cambridge University Press

AlexanderJeffrey C. Durkheimian sociology: cultural studies 1988 Cambridge Cambridge University Press

ApostolidisPaulWilliamsJuliet A. Public Affairs: Politics in the Age of Sex Scandals 2004 Durham Duke University Press

BirdS. Elizabeth LullJamesHinermanStephen “What a Story!: Understanding the Audience for Scandal.” Media Scandals: Morality and Desire in the Popular Culture Marketplace 1997 Cambridge Polity Press 99 121

BowlerJeffrey A.BowlerShaun “Politicians, Scandals, and Trust in Government.” Political Behavior 2004 26 3 271 288

ClarkAnna Scandal: The Sexual Politics of the British Constitution 2003 Princeton Princeton University Press

DiamondLarry Jay Developing Democracy: Toward Consolidation 1999 Baltimore Johns Hopkins University Press

DobelJ. Patrick “Judging the Private Lives of Public Officials.” Administration & Society 1998 30 2 115 142

DurkheimÉmile The Division of Labor in Society 1893/1984 New York Free Press

GamsonJoshua ApostolidisP.WilliamsJ. A. “Normal Sins: Sex Scandal Narratives as Institutional Morality Tales.” Public Affairs: Politics in the Age of Sex Scandals 2004 Durham Duke University Press 39 68

GarmentSuzanne Scandal: The Culture of Mistrust in American Politics 1991 New York Times Books

JacobssonKerstinLöfmarckErik “A Sociology of Scandal and Moral Transgression: The Swedish ‘Nannygate’ Scandal.” Acta Sociologica 2008 51 3 203 216

JamiesonKathleeen HallAdaySean “When is Presidential behavior public and when is it private?” Presidential Studies Quarterly 1998 28 4 856 861

KenskiKate M. DentonR. E.Jr.HollowayR. L. “The Framing of Network News Coverage During the First Three Months of the Clinton-Lewinsky Scandal.” Images Scandal and Communication Strategies of the Clinton Presidency 2003 Westport, Connecticut Praeger 247 270

LogueJohn MarkovitsA. S.SilversteinM. “Appreciating Scandal as a Political Art Form, or, Making an Intellectual Virtue of a Political Vice.” The Politics of Scandal: Power and Process in Liberal Democracies 1988 New York Holmes & Meier 254 265

LullJamesHinermanStephen LullJ.HinermanS. “The Search for Scandal.” Media Scandals: Morality and Desire in the Popular Culture Marketplace 1997 Cambridge Polity Press 1 33

MahlerMatthew “Politics as a Vocation.” Qualitative Sociology 2006 29 3 281 300

MarkovitsAndrei S.SilversteinMark The Politics of Scandal: Power and Process in Liberal Democracies 1988 New York Holmes & Meier

NeckelSighard “Political Scandals: An Analytical Framework.” Comparative Sociology 2005 4 1/2 101 111

OrtegaFélix “The New Public Space of Politics.” International Review of Sociology 2004 14 2 209 221

PillaiRajnandiniStites-DoeSusanBrodowskyGlen “Presidential Scandal Leadership: A Natural Laboratory Test of the Resiliency of President Clinton’s Transformational Leadership During the Impeachment Crisis.” Journal of Applied Social Psychology 2004 34 6 1109 1130

RayburnCarol A.OsmanSuzanne “Self-Ratings and Expectations of the U.S. President, Ideal Physicians, and Ideal Automechanic.” Journal of Business Ethics 2004 50 1 45 51

RitzerGeorge Sociological Theory 2000 New York McGraw Hill

SchudsonMichael “Notes on Scandal and the Watergate Legacy.” American Behavioral Scientist 2004 47 9 1231 1238

ThompsonJohn B. LullJ.HinermanS. “Scandal and Social Theory.” Media Scandals: Morality and Desire in the Popular Culture Marketplace 1997 Cambridge Polity Press 34 64

ThompsonJohn B. Political Scandal: Power and Visibility in the Media Age 2000 Cambridge Polity Press

ThompsonJohn B. “The New Visibility.” Theory Culture & Society 2005 22 6 31 51

TiffenRodney Scandals: Media Politics & Corruption in Contemporary Australia 1999 Sydney University of New South

TumberHoward “Scandal and Media in the United Kingdom.” American Behavioral Scientist 2004 47 8 1122 1137

TumberHowardWaisbordSilvio R. “Political Scandals and Media Across Democracies, Volume I.” American Behavioral Scientist 2004 47 8 1031 1039

WatermanRichard W.Jenkins-SmithHank C.SilvaCarol L. “The Expectations Gap Thesis: Public Attitudes toward an Incumbent President.” Journal of Politics 1999 61 4 944 966

WilliamsRobert Political Scandals in the USA 1998 Edinburgh Keele University Press

3)

Gamson (2004) concurs that rather than proving the normal with the deviant individual transgressors seem more normal than not given the circulation of cultural norms through the media which focus on the normative disorder and what cannot be believed.

Information

Content Metrics

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 20 20 12
Full Text Views 30 30 24
PDF Downloads 4 4 2
EPUB Downloads 0 0 0