|Re: Gossip||<– Date –> <– Thread –>|
|From: Fred H Olson (fholsoncohousing.org)|
|Date: Wed, 27 Feb 2013 05:15:15 -0800 (PST)|
The discussion of gossip is complicated by varying definitions of "gossip". Talk about third parties in the community can vary from what I call "news" to malicious and false information and every thing in between. The way I read Sharon's post she was including the news end of the spectrum. It seems to me that news is clearly beneficial. Of course the malicious and false is unhelpful. But the argument is made that what I'll call the accurately critical can be helpful. Occasionally rules for group discussion include something like 'no discussion of people not present'. This strikes me as an overly broad rule intended to prevent the negative. Sharon wrote: > There was a wonderful article in the NYTimes a few years > ago on the benefits of gossip. My search for the article came up with this from the NYT: "Studies Find That Gossip Isn't Just Loose Talk" By ALINA TUGEND Published: June 15, 2012 [ Business Section 6/16/12] Tho it was less than a year ago it otherwise seems like it might be what Sharon was thinking of: http://pirate.shu.edu/~plummeev/Dynamics1610/Gossip-NYT.htm The wikipedia article on gossip also also discusses the positive and negative aspects of gossip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gossip Fred -- Fred H. Olson Minneapolis,MN 55411 USA (near north Mpls) Email: fholson at cohousing.org 612-588-9532 My Link Pg: http://fholson.cohousing.org My org: Communications for Justice -- Free, superior listserv's w/o ads
- (no other messages in thread)
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.