Scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could.

The statements says that scandals are useful because they focus our attentions on problems in a way that no speaker or reformer ever could. I partly agree with the statement; however, I believe the scandals are useful when it comes to attracting attention, I don’t think it does it in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. I shall elaborate my thoughts in the following essay.

To begin with, scandals are typically shameful and people usually manage to conceal anything dishonest they have committed. Ironically, human beings are driven by curiosity; therefore, they are fascinated by the idea of learning others’ secrets and make personal judgments. Discovering what is under the counter is undoubtedly a human nature. Consequently, when a scandal happens, especially among important figures such as politician and celebrities, it attracts people’s attention so effectively that no one could compare. For example, Tiger Woods, an American professional golf player. When the society found out his chaotic personal life and affair, the whole world was focusing on him. Everything he did was seriously scrutinized and over interpreted because the society desired to find out why he cheated on his wife? Was his marriage a misery? Was the scandal going to destroy his career? People were looking for answer.
Without the present of scandals, what we know about Tiger Woods is nothing more than a successfully golf player. However, his scandal has tempted people to learn more about him since people were trying to figure the truth.

Secondly, a scandal can represent weaknesses of the society; therefore when a scandal breaks out, people become hysterical and embark on assessing the existed system. Inevitably, such process attracts people’s attention since they have been aware of the flaw of the society they live in and will spare no effort to correct it. A compelling example was in 2004, in Taiwan, the president at that time was accused of bribery. His scandal was whirling the whole society and after a preliminary investigation, polices has targeted a certain group of people. However, the bribery was far more involved than everyone could have imagined: over one hundred people were involved in this incident and therefore the election was invalid. Moreover, people started to wonder how could this happen and discover some flaws of the existed election system. The government worked with professionals from all fields of study to correct and create a better election system. Thus, had it not been the scandal, people shouldn’t have noticed problems of our society, let alone resolving them.

However, the statement averts that scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. It is spurious since people alike can catch others’ attentions effectively. People like an important national figure, a famous actor or actress and a successful athlete, they are prestigious and influential. Therefore, they can call for attention from people easily. For example, Gandhi, who led Indian Independence movement against the Great Britain Empire, was a crucial figure in India society and his ideology of the peaceful movement was championed by people at his time. Gandhi caught people’s attention not by scandals but by his philosophy: prioritizing his country’s as well as his people’s welfare and fight against the unreasonable England government. Thus, although a scandal is useful to focus people’s attention on problems, it doesn’t mean that is does in ways that no one could.

To sum up, I agree with the idea that scandals are useful because they focus our attention on problems with efficiency. However, people can do that in ways scandals could as well.