Mainstream Media & the Petraeus Scandal

David Petraeus, one of the most decorated and well-respected US military and political leaders in the last decade, found himself caught up in a dilemma which many great figures before him have found themselves caught up in. Similarities might be drawn to other scandalous instances in United States history such as President Richard Nixon with the Watergate Scandal or President Bill Clinton and his affair with Monica Lewinsky. Much like Bill Clinton, David Petraeus found himself in a dilemma when he began an extramarital affair with a younger woman who worked in close proximity, and was eventually publicized.

First, a little history on the matter is important to gain a better perspective on the situation. Petraeus and Paula Broadwell, his eventual mistress and biographer, first met in two-thousand six at Harvard University where he was giving a speech about Iraq. The second person of interest is a woman by the name of Jill Kelley, whom he met when he was head of the U.S. Central Command in Tampa, Florida at social events around the city. In two-thousand eight, Paula Broadwell began an analysis of Petraeus’s leadership skills which was the beginning of the two’s working relationship and eventual affair. Her study of his leadership eventually evolved into an official biography in two-thousand ten when he was appointed as commander of the war in Afghanistan. Finally, a year-and-a-half later in September of two-thousand eleven, General Petraeus was sworn in at the director of the CIA and not long after, began his affair with Paula Broadwell. In the spring of two thousand twelve, Jill Kelley, the woman whom David Petraeus met in Tampa began to receive threatening emails. After feeling her life was under threat, she reported the messages and the FBI began investigating. The FBI found that the messages contained classified information of Petraeus, and in fear of a security breach, investigated further, eventually discovering Paula Broadwell and her affair with David Petraeus. (Associated Press, 2015).

David Petraeus’ scandal was notably, a two-edged sword. On one end, it is bad press for a high-up and well respected government worker to be involved in, and caught, in an extramarital affair. On the other hand however, Petraeus’ scandal was not just the result of an affair. If this had been the only problem, it is possible his situation was not have been publicized in the way it was. When the FBI began investigating the threats, what they found was that David Petraeus was exposing classified material. Additionally, he was caught with eight binders of classified documents in a desk drawer at his house after his resignation, even after testifying that he no longer had classified material in his possession. An interesting point to note in the scandal with David Petraeus and Paula Broadwell is that currently existing politicians have been afflicted with either sides of the scanedal and yet, have been able to maintain their political careers. On one end, we can see other instances of sex scandals. Bill Clinton is a prime example. Though Clinton was impeached (though eventually acquitted), he was able to finish his term of president and from a modern point of view, he is still in many ways relevant to the political world. Even President Thomas Jefferson was widely suspected of having been involved in an affair with one of his slaves, and he was still able to maintain his presidency for an additional seven years. On the other side, Hillary Clinton is a political figure who in recent years has also been accused of security breaches and been scrutinized by many.

Although each of these politicians share the common characteristic of having been involved in a political scandal, they differ from Petraeus in that they were to get away with it to some degree. This is probably due to two big reasons. The first one is that the two sides of David Petraeus’s scandals worked together to create more outrage than normal. The fact that he was involved in a sex scandal symbolized to the public that he has a low base of morals. Additionally, interestingly enough, when looking at past instances of political scandals, sex scandals seem to have a bigger impact on political figures careers than do other seemingly more important transgressions, such as sensitive information leaks. That said, the former side of his scandal, combined with the fact that his leaks of classified material show he was careless about handling information within such sensitive and important positions in the government, more than likely worked as a double-whammy to end his career.

The high standards we hold for US servicemen seems to translate to the political realm as well

On the other side of the coin, is the fact that when we look at past examples of political scandals, the high standards we hold for US servicemen seems to translate to the political realm as well. Another recent example of a political scandal surrounding a high-level US servicemen is the resignation of previous General Stanley McChrystal in two-thousand ten. Although the general did not commit any serious offenses, the scathing remarks his aides made about the president and other administration officials which were published in a Rolling Stones’ magazine article, brought about a premature ending to his thirty-four year career in the US military. For most politicians, this would barely have made news, if at all. The biggest takeaway from this is that many Americans hold military officials to a higher standard.

When taking all sides of the issue into account; the double-edged sword of his transgressions, and the much higher standards we hold to US servicemen, both low and high ranking, we can see that they formed an event which turned into a giant “feeding-frenzy” on the part of United States media. In a study conducted by Marion R. Just of Wellesley College and Ann N. Crigler of the University of Southern California, the researchers found that the media tends to latch onto scandals committed by individuals, much more than it does to organizations or institutions within the government (Just and Crigler, 2014, pg. 5).

Something of irony is that it was the metadata collected of Paula Broadwell’s multiple anonymous email accounts that led the FBI to discover the illicit relationship between her and General Petraeus.

One interesting recent government scandal where we can see evidence of this is that of Edward Snowden and the NSA. Although large numbers of Americans were against the unrestricted collection of metadata on the part of the NSA, figures such as Edward Snowden and Glenn Greenwald (who assisted Snowden in analyzing and publishing the leaked information) saw extreme amounts of negative coverage on the part of the media. The mainstream media made multiple efforts to destroy Greenwald’s reputation as a journalist. Something of irony to note is that it was the metadata collected of Paula Broadwell’s multiple anonymous email accounts that led the FBI to discover the illicit relationship between her and General Petraeus. Additionally, Just and Crigler make note of a finding in a separate study, which makes note that “rare scandals which involve multiple parties or politicians have a much larger negative effect than their increasingly pervasive single-party and single-politician counterparts” (Kumlin and Esaiasson, 2011, pg. 42). Basically, scandals involving non-partisan political figures tend to gather much greater negative attention than that of their partisan counterparts. In a 2012 poll collected by YouGov and published by the Huffington Post, the author makes note that “public reaction… seems to have largely bypassed party lines” (Edwards-Levy, 2012). In fact, over half of Republicans seemed to agree that Petraeus was right to resign from his position following the publicizing of his scandal. The author goes on to mention the fact that Petraeus, a known registered Republican, who served under Obama, a democratic president, does not “lend itself to easy partisan spin (unusual for a Washington Scandal).”

Overall, it is clear that now retired General David Petraeus’ scandal has been given much more serious and large coverage than hav other similar recent political scandals. Such instances include the extramarital affair of President Bill Clinton and Monica Lewinsky. Although Bill Clinton was given much negative attention, he was able to finish the remainder of his presidency. On the other hand, not intentionally paired in this writing, but relevant none-the-less are the allegations in recent years of Hillary Clinton’s potential breach of security. Hillary Clinton has received much scandal in recent history and has survived virtually unscathed. Upon looking at David Petraeus’ situation, we can see many reasons as to why he received such harsh attention from the media and why he has continued to have problems even in the last year. Previously mentioned were the facts that his scandal covered a double-edged sword and when paired with the fact that he rose to prominence through the ranks of the the US military, he has likely been held to a much higher standard than other US politicians are. Additionally, his nonpartisan position in the government and the fact that he is a single individual lends credence to the possibility that these factors were at least partially responsible to him receiving such a large amount of negative attention from the media. Overall, Americans on both sides of the line seem to agree on one thing, that David Petraeus did the right thing by resigning.