The features of the political scandals mediatization in contemporary Russia

The article provides a systematization of political scandals in contempo- rary Russia. The study embraces modern approaches to the interpretation of trends in the personification of power expressing that the personal qualities of political leaders, such as charisma, sincerity and the ability to empathize, play a central role in shaping the trust and loyalty of citizens. The authors state that in the context of media-centered politics, the image of a politician in the media has become a key marker of his/her legitimacy. Since scandals in politics provide a high level of involvement and interest of the audience, they are one of the most striking and influential manifestations of the mediatization of a political figure.

The source base of the study was news information from 14 key online publications of modern Russia for the period from 07/13/2023 to 07/13/2024. Using a large language model (LLM) and quantitative data analysis methods, the article systematizes po- litical scandals by analyzing their chronological and geographical distribution, intensity, and the involvement of various officials. It is noted that corruption scandals occupy a central place in the media agenda of contemporary Russia. Attention is drawn to the fact that media personalities such as journalists, influencers, and political commentators play an important role in the aggregation and dissemination of scandals, enhancing their impact on public opinion and political stability. Key aggregators of political scandals in modern Russia are identified. The study emphasizes that political scandals are a critical mecha- nism through which society evaluates its leaders, which makes them an important element of political life in today’s Russia.

1. Basinger S., Rottinghaus В. Skeletons in White House closets: A discussion of modern presidential scandals. Political science quarterly. 2012, Vol. 127, N 2, P. 290–302.

2. Barker R. Legitimating identities the self-presentations of rulers and subjects. Cambridge: Cambridge university press, 2001, 158 p.

3. Carlson M., Robinson S., Lewis S. Digital press criticism: The symbolic dimensions of Donald Trump’s assault on U.S. journalists as the “Enemy of the people. Digital journalism. 2020, Vol. 9, N 6, P. 737–754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/21670811.2020.1836981

4. Dziuda W., Howell W.G. Political scandal: a theory. American journal of political science. 2021, Vol. 65, N 1, P. 197–209.

5. Efanov A.A. Models of discrediting a political actor through the media: a sociological dimension. Proceedings of higher educational institutions. Sociology. Economics. Politics. 2018, N 3, P. 42–51. (In Russ.)

6. Esser F., Matthes J. Mediatization effects on political news, political actors, political decisions, and political audiences. In: Kriesi H., Lavenex S., Esser F., Matthes J., Bühlmann M., Bochsler D. (eds). Democracy in the age of globalization and mediatization. Challenges to democracy in the 21st Century series. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013, P. 177–201. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137299871_8

7. Farkas X., Bene M. Images, politicians, and social media: patterns and effects of politicians’ image-based political communication strategies on social media. The international journal of press/politics. 2021, Vol. 26, N 1, P. 119–142. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/1940161220959553

8. Just M., Cringler A. Media coverage of political scandals. Effects of personalization and potential for democratic reforms. In: Tumber H., Waisbord S. (eds). The Routledge companion to media and scandal. London: Routledge, 2019, P. 36–48.

9. Lalancette M., Rayland V. The power of political Image: Justin Trudeau, Instagram, and celebrity politics. American behavioral scientist. 2019, Vol. 63, N 7, P. 888–924. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/0002764217744838

10. Linegar M., Kocielnik R., Alvarez R.M. Large language models and political science. Frontiers in political science. 2023, Vol. 5, P. 1–12. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2023.1257092

11. Lukjanova G. V., Solovjov A.Y. Peculiarities of the agenda formation in the Telegram messenger // News of the Saratov University. New series. Series: Sociology. Political science. – 2024. – Vol. 24, N 1. P. 90–97. (In Russ.)

12. Neckel S. Political scandals: an analytical framework. Comparative sociology. 2005, Vol. 4, N 1–2, P. 101–114. DOI: https://doi.prg/10.1163/1569133054621950

13. Rottinghaus B. Surviving scandal: The institutional and political dynamics of National and State executive scandals. Political science & politics. 2013, Vol. 47, N 1, P. 131–140. DOI: https://doi.org/10/1017/S1049096513001509

14. Thompson J. B. Political scandal. Power and visibility in the media age. Cambridge: Polity press, 2000, 336 p.

15. Ushanova I.A. Scandal as a form of mediatized communication. Vestnik NovSU. 2013, Vol. 1, N 73, P 129–132. (In Russ.)

16. Zulli D. Political Scandals in the modern media environment: applying a new analytical framework to Hillary Clinton’s whitewater and e-mail scandals. International journal of communication. 2020, Vol. 14, P. 5218–5236. DOI: https://doi.org/1932-8036/20200005