On gossip [Matthew's Journal]

You're viewing

emperor's journal
Create a Dreamwidth Account Learn More

Reload page in style: site light

←

→

Should you pass on what was said at a private party?

I'm interested in what people round here feel about this. I tend to try and avoid putting people in the situation where they overhear juicy gossip they might be tempted to pass on, but would feel aggrieved if my conversations from a party were passed on. Particularly, if I talked to Alice, and mentioned Bob, I'd be upset if I later found that Charlie had overheard and passed my remarks on to Bob.

←

→

There are 21 comments on this entry. (Reply.)

I reckon that anyone who hears anything I say could repeat it to anyone; and that if I don't want Bob to know about what I said that I should only say it where people-who-won't-tell-Bob might hear.

I think I'd think that anyone who told Bob was more Bob's friend that my friend (especially if what I'd said was "Bob is scum"); but I reckon I have to determine that about people prior to saying things and failure to do so is my fault.

If I heard you telling Alice that you thought that Bob was a horrible person who you never want to talk to again and I later was talking to Bob and discovered that Bob thought that you thought that he was a great friend of yours and I happened to like Bob, or at least think that Bob should not be allowed to go on believing lies that might hurt him then... yes, I might well tell Bob that that's not really the case.

I think that the case where I tell Charlie that you said that Bob (etc) is less clear because telling *Bob* might actually be doing Bob a favour (and I like Bob) but telling *Charlie* is probably just spreading gossip about.

Although if Charlie was planning a dinner party and about to invite you and Bob I might say "oh, I thought Matthew didn't like Bob"; quite possibly having forgotten why I thought that.

There is always the problem that if you say to Alice "Bob is a trainspotter" then I might later say to Charlie "oh, I heard Bob is a trainspotter" if Bob's hobbies and/or trainspotting came up in my conversation with Charlie - and I might not even remember how I came by this information.

[link] [reply]

Also I think that telling Dorcas-who-writes-for-the-Sun is pretty unlike telling Charlie-my-mate and very unlike telling Bob-who-this-is-all-about.

[link] [parent] [reply]

Generally no.

If it's something that's very illegal or very harmful to someone (but not inherently illegal) then probably.

If it's just to screw someone over (like this example) then you shouldn't but you can...

[link] [reply]

Charlie shouldn't be eavesdropping but equally you shouldn't have secret conversations where Charlie can hear.

In some cases Charlie may reasonably feel their responsibilities to Bob are the most important thing. For instance perhaps you were gossiping about Bob's boyfriend's bit on the side and Charlie is Bob's best friend.

The case at hand, though, concerned a senior politician allegedly proposing the arrangement of a breach of the rules they were supposed to operate under, which I think is quite different to the kind of gossip you and I are likely to have and - if true! - deserving of public exposure.

[link] [reply]

I tend to clarify on a case-by-case basis before telling anyone anything especially juicy. And breaking an explicit confidence is definitely not OK.

Equally, I sometimes ask people how sensitive what they're telling me is, or in extreme cases tell them to stop because I won't be bound to secrecy about some particular issue. I try to apply common sense, but it does annoy me when people tell me secrets without labelling them as such then complain when I talk about them with others.

[link] [reply]

Would you take the same line were you Bob?

[link] [reply]

We had training at work years ago about acceptable standards of behaviour. One of the main things we were told was not to do anything we wouldn't want to see on the front page of the newspapers.

If Alice, Bob or Charlie thought that being in the vicinity of a particular conversation might come back to haunt them in the future, they should have been sensible enough to say "I'm off for a wazz while you talk about this. Let me know when it's safe to come back!", or WTTE. Yes, it might have killed the mood and have been a PITA, but that's the price of being in these positions and claiming to have a spotless soul, especially if you're flinging mud at others.

Gossip is, by nature, passed on. That's what makes it gossip.

[link] [reply]

I think you shouldn't be surprised if Charlie does this, in the situation where Charlie dislikes you and likes Bob, and feels Bob would benefit from knowing. Similarly, if Charlie saw you e.g. getting off with Alice who was monogamously attached to Bob, he might feel morally obliged to tip Bob off about it! Also, what if the thing you said to Alice about Bob involved a shared conspiracy to murder Bob? I think Charlie would definitely be morally obliged to tell Bob (and the police, for that matter!).

However, if all of you are friends, and you've said nothing more terrible than that you think Bob is crap at nethack, I think it would be rude, to say the least, for Charlie to mention this to Bob.

[link] [reply]

What if it was something *nice* you'd said about Bob? Would passing that on be OK?

[link] [reply]

Obviously if you learn something in confidence, you shouldn't pass it on. Sometimes people explicitly say, "This is in confidence", "Just between ourselves", etc. Sometimes it's obvious from the context or subject matter that the information must have been intended to be confidential. On the other hand, if I say something competely anodyne to you or in your presence, I wouldn't mind your passing it on. As usual there's a grey area where there's potential for confusion.

If something is said at a "private party" with, say, 25 people present, the context would suggest to me that a confidence probably wasn't intended, in the absence of any contrary indication. On the other hand, if it was an intimate party, I would expect things to be treated more confidentially.

That still leaves the question of people who overhear remarks by accident (obviously intentionally eavesdropping is bad). They seem to me to be in a slightly different position from the people who are party to the conversation, who have consented to receive the confidence, either expressly or implicitly. In your example, Charlie might be a stranger to you, but very close to Bob. If what you've said was important to Bob (rather than just tittle-tattle), it seems difficult to argue that the course of moral perfection is for Charlie to keep it under his hat.

Editted to correct a couple of typos and to add that sometimes people say foolish things when they're drunk. It's probably best not to repeat such things to those not present.

Edited Date: 2008-10-22 05:48 pm (UTC)

[link] [reply]

sometimes people say foolish things when they're drunk. It's probably best not to repeat such things to those not present.

I'm not so sure. I often find that someone's behaviour whilst drunk is a good indicator of their real character. I recall someone I was at college with who everyone else seemed to think was great but I always got the impression was a tosser. One evening whilst drunk he came out with a bigoted tirade about how women, jews and homosexuals get an advantage in the labour market. I always wished that more people had known that he was a bigoted tosser, particularly when he ran for JCR president.

[link] [parent] [reply]

In vino veritas, as they say...

[link] [parent] [reply]

I'm not sure either! I agree that people don't usually say wholly uncharacteristic things when drunk. On the other hand, character is not merely about what we believe, but what we choose to say. There is a class of statements which are true, but which are best left unsaid. It's those statements, rather than the revealing of objectionable views, which I had in mind. We can't unsay things, of course, and that's our fault for getting so drunk that we lost our usual sense of what is socially appropriate, but it is still best to not to repeat the thing which would have been better unsaid.

I'm not actually sure that the drunkness is the key here. I have a feeling that people are (and should be allowed to be) unguarded when the port is being passed around by candlelight, and it's not quite fair to expose the things they say to examination by the light of day. Perhaps it's just romanticism on my part though.

[link] [parent] [reply]

I'm not sure really. I'm rather tactless, so would be unlikely to be too bothered as I'd be willing to say the same things to Bob anyway. I'd probably think it was a bit remiss of Alice though.

The main complication I can think of would be if 'Bob' had asked me to be a bit less straightforward to his face than is my wont, because it upset him or something. Then I could imagine it leading to doom...

[link] [reply]

I'd like to recommend _Women's talk? : a social history of "gossip" in working-class neighbourhoods, 1880-1960_ by Melanie Tebbutt (http://www.librarything.com/work/2266755/details/10634465). Tebbutt argues that gossip took many forms and had many purposes and results.

[link] [reply]

How chunky a book is that?

[link] [parent] [reply]

It's about 15mm thick, from memory (trade paperback size).

[link] [parent] [reply]

Hm, sounds interesting. I should try and look it out.

[link] [parent] [reply]

Common sense is good. Sometimes it's hard to tell common knowledge from guarded knowledge, but when in doubt I find it's generally better to keep my mouth shut. I tend to assume that anything I say can come back and bite me, or others, so if I am saying something better made clandestine I make sure the person I'm talking to knows this (and is trustworthy, o'course).

[link] [reply]

It depends far too much on the nature of the party, the nature of the information you mentioned about Bob, and the relationship of Charlie to Bob to give any general thoughts.

As a couple of extreme examples, if you were intending harm to Bob, if you were shouting the information to Alice or if Charlie is Bob's spouse then I wouldn't consider you to have any right to feel aggrieved.

There is, of course, a considerable difference between telling Bob and telling Dan the journalist, which is what your article was discussing.

[link] [reply]

And there's also the situation: if Bob is (say) a professional person, and the comment is about his professional conduct, if the comment is made at a public event, such as a fund raiser for a charity in a hotel, it is different from the same comment being made at Alice's birthday party in her house.

[link] [parent] [reply]

Sun	Mon	Tue	Wed	Thu	Fri	Sat
			1	2	3	4
5	6	7	8	9	10	11
12	13	14	15	16	17	18
19	20	21	22	23	24	25 1
26	27	28	29	30	31

Matthew's Journal

On gossip

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

(no subject)

October