All in all, pretty solid grammar wise and some great word choices (exaggerated, libertine, digress) I would do a few things to smooth out the flow. Also, 'flinch' is not a noun, as you used it. First and last names should be capitalized.
You have a great reason for disagreeing with the claim (scandals are not useful since they are inflated by media, which often creates new problems) and a solid example. You also mention that the issues which cause scandals should not be of concern to individuals. That may be true, but the idea is to discuss whether scandals are useful in focusing our attention on problems or not. You address supporters of the claim and say that the Wikileaks scandal was mostly false. Even so, did it cause the public to focus attention on the problem of government corruption?
I would suggest trying to focus more on the claim, to add more reasons and to fully analyze all reasons.
It is no doubt that scandals lay huge impacts on our thoughts, but scandals can't be credited with forcing us to focus on our real problems, solely because of this. Yes, scandals focus our attention on some problems, but many of these problems are contrived (i.e., the problems are unnecessary for that situation).
Many scandals involve celebrities; and most common among these are sex scandals. Though the public gets deeply and emotionally involved in these scandals (often partly due to the media), these scandals have nothing to do with lives of common man. Outcomes and results of such scandals are usually very dramatic, which is exaggerated further by the media to increase their particular ratings (e.g., TRP or GRP for television).
Moreover, most of these scandals are fake--problems caused by the scandals and not the actual root problems. Take for example, the recent Tiger Wood woods scandal. Tiger Woods was found guilty of being a libertine. Is this a serious problem for the public to focus on? In my opinion this is a completely personal situation. Focusing on such irrelevant things will make matters worse. It's very possible that fans of Tiger Woods had the wrong message delivered to them.
Supporters of the claim may give as an example the Wikileaks scandal, planned by Julian Assange to focus the public on national corruption. In reality their is no genuine proof of these scandals to be true. In fact, most of these scandals were later found to be part of a plot to undermine ruling federal governments.
Scandals don't focus on actual problems of society, they instead digress the public from the actual problems faced by "everyday man." Most of these scandals are deliberate in nature, promulgated by media people to attract public attention. Thus, scandals do nothing positive and only serve to increase media's revenue.