Gossip

This is quite different from Banly's approach. This is actually more my style. My main concern is involving my friends and family whose skin isn't as thick as mine.

Proof that great minds can think differently! :biggrin1:

If you think there's a reasonable chance it will reach them then you have to preempt it. Let them hear it from you in private before they hear it in public. Nothing worse than being sandbagged by bad news in public. Remember Camilla Parker-Bowles being questioned about Princess Diana's claims that Camilla was still seeing Prince Charles? Her eyes turned into headlamps and she just rushed into her house without comment. Nothing could look guiltier.

By talking to your family and friends first they can act to refute the gossip as they hear it and be unflappable. The more people close to the person being gossiped about deny the claim, the more everyone else believes the claim is false (even if it isn't).

I don't want to come across as a screaming banshee, but I think that some things need to be taken public--especially if the gossip has reached many people. I think that if you appear tactful and rational then you keep your credibility.

Indeed you do; particularly if you can address each point believably and with certitude.
 
Wow, awesome Jason. Maybe I'm sensitive to all this because I had a friend years ago who was accused of saying something he did not say. He remained quiet on the topic, and his local issue quickly grew into a national issue (international, even). He literally had reporters camped out on his lawn. Within a short time after the story broke, he had a heart attack and died. The heart attack was attributed to stress from the controversy. The whole incident was later covered in a book called “Death by Journalism” and its sort of a textbook on how not to deal (and not deal) with negative journalism and...gossip.

It's startling how such conduct can quickly spin out of control for all involved.

Article Stirs Up Firestorm

normtricon_notrans.gif

August 23, 2002

BOB GARFIELD: Death and taxes. We just heard about a reporter's impact on the latter. Now a story about the former. Could there be death by journalism? Yes, contends the author of a recent book called Death by Journalism that documents a new story and its effect on a small North Carolina town. The original reports and the book's account caused such a stir that the reporter of the stories has never spoken on tape about his work -- until now. From member station WFDD in Asheboro, North Carolina, Larry Schooler has this report.

LARRY SCHOOLER: In 1998 a press release touting an upcoming adult education class caught the eye of Ethan Feinsilver, then a reporter for the Greensboro News & Record who was based in the smaller nearby town of Asheboro. The course's title immediately interested him. North Carolina's role in the war for Southern independence, a course sponsored in part by a group called The Sons of Confederate Veterans.

ETHAN FEINESILVER: They said to me: the people teaching this class have a bone to pick with the traditional way that the Civil War has been taught. You know, a hypothesis. And then when I showed up on the first day of class, at least that orientation was confirmed for me.

LARRY SCHOOLER: The course's instructor, Jack Purdue, an amateur historian known for his meticulous research and preparation, introduced the class with a prepared speech that included the following lines that Feinsilver later read in print.

ETHAN FEINSILVER: It's time to remove any racial overtones from the War for Southern Independence and portray it for what it really was -- a war over the rights of a state to secede and a people for self-determination.

LARRY SCHOOLER: Feinsilver's interest in the class grew when he learned that one class session would be devoted to exploring the wartime experiences of African-Americans and Native Americans. Feinsilver couldn't make it to the class itself, but a handout he obtained from that session gave him the hook for his story. The guest instructor, Reverend Herman White, cited a collection of slave testimonies from the 1930s which suggested that, quote, "More than 70 percent of ex-slaves had only good experiences to report about their life as a slave in the South," end quote. Feinsilver says he was surprised when both Jack Purdue and Herman White essentially confirmed that they had taught such material in the class.

ETHAN FEINSILVER: For instance saying something like you know so it sounds like you're saying that these slaves were really -- they had no problem with being slaves? I was sort of sounding a little incredulous, but really I wanted to make sure that I wasn't taking something out of context as Jerry Bledsoe says that I did -- I mean I wanted to make sure that what I was going to put in the paper was something that these guys stood behind. And they did stand behind it, very firmly.

LARRY SCHOOLER: Feinsilver led his story on the class with the following: "A course at Randolph Community College teaches that most black people were happy under slavery and that tens of thousands of black men fought for the Confederacy because they believed in the Southern cause."

JERRY BLEDSOE: His first story was almost completely false --so many incredibly, as the tapes prove, so much of it was absolutely false!

LARRY SCHOOLER: Author Jerry Bledsoe wrote a book entitled Death by Journalism on the community college course, Feinsilver's reporting and the aftermath. Hardly a day after Feinsilver's story first appeared in the News & Record's Sunday Metro section, CNN, the BBC and Good Morning America joined hundreds of other media outlets seeking comment from Purdue, the college and others involved in the class. Randolph Community College officials ultimately canceled the class saying they needed more time to study what had been taught. After months of intense media scrutiny and the cancellation of the course, Instructor Jack Purdue died of a heart attack, giving Jerry Bledsoe the title for his book. Bledsoe held both Feinsilver and the News & Record partly responsible for Purdue's death at the age of 60 because, he says, Feinsilver's reporting bordered on libel.

JERRY BLEDSOE: There's not a class probably being held anywhere in the world today that somebody couldn't go into, take one or two lines out of context, somehow - that might seem sensational - and twist those to make them definitely sensational -- and then go out and destroy the, the teacher with them. And that's what happened here.

LARRY SCHOOLER: Specifically, Bledsoe, who reviewed videotapes of all the class sessions says Reverend Herman White was not suggesting that slaves were happy. That was Feinsilver's paraphrase, one later abandoned by the News & Record in subsequent articles. Bledsoe says the context of White's remarks is critical; in this case White was trying to demonstrate that not all slaves had been abused by their masters and some had in fact fought for the Confederacy.

JERRY BLEDSOE: If they had reported that Herman White had reported the survey and how he tied it in to the class and all that, nobody would have read it! It simply wouldn't have been read. You could have reported that and that would have been fine! And journalism is not horseshoes. There are so many people now who seem to think well if we sort of hit around the stop, you know, it still counts. Well, it doesn't. It doesn't. In journalism you have to throw ringers every single time.

LARRY SCHOOLER: Bledsoe couldn't convince Ethan Feinsilver or anyone else at the News & Record to comment on the record for his book. For his part, Feinsilver says he was shocked by the international reaction to the piece and by the local uproar. A group of outraged readers even took out a newspaper ad personally attacking Feinsilver and accusing him of race-baiting. Through it all, Feinsilver stood by his reporting.

ETHAN FEINSILVER: I don't think it's the job of the media to always measure what the outcome is going to be before they report what's happening!

LARRY SCHOOLER: But Feinsilver concedes that he wishes he had better measured how a Southern town might react to an issue that had been so volatile for so long -- the legacy of the Confederacy.

ETHAN FEINSILVER: But on the other hand of course, newspaper is part of the community; newspaper can be part of a solution or helping a situation, just like it can be part of exacerbating a situation. So you do have the competing principles. But I just think you have to always kind of have both in mind, and I don't think we really had -- I didn't really have the second thing in mind when I was doing the story.

LARRY SCHOOLER: Feinsilver won't take responsibility for maliciously and deliberately harming course instructor Jack Purdue as author Jerry Bledsoe suggests; and even Bledsoe can't pin Purdue's death on the reporting of his class. But Roy Peter Clark who analyzes media ethics for the Poynter Institute says journalists must still ask themselves a series of questions about a story's ultimate effects before and after publication or broadcast.

ROY PETER CLARK: What's the journalistic purpose of my publishing this? What good will it effect in the community? Can I foresee the consequences of publication? Are any of them harmful? What are my alternatives in terms of how I play it; where I play it? I think journalists who ask those kinds of questions routinely are going to make the best kinds of judgments no matter how difficult the story is.

LARRY SCHOOLER: Since the publication of the original stories in 1998, Ethan Feinsilver has left journalism, though he says he may return. Jerry Bledsoe's book has sold sluggishly, perhaps in part because many North Carolinians want to forget this chapter of history. For On the Media, I'm Larry Schooler in Asheboro, North Carolina. [MUSIC]

copyright 2002 WNYC Radio
empty.gif
 
Thanks CB, its like its 1998 all over again.

Ethan just didnt get it. He interviewed me a couple of times...often baiting me. "Newspaper articles should show conflict" he once said to me, after I told him there was no tension in a story (unrelated to Jack) he was writing, "that's what we do."

It was all very difficult. I learned, among many other things, not to let gossip, innuendo and false accusations go unanswered.
 
So, if an LPSG member was privately saying horrible things about you to other members, and word got back to you, it seems that these are your options:

  1. Tell a moderator and hope that they with the problem, which they probably won't unless it happens in the forums.
  2. Just wait and hope that everyone who hears this bullshit takes it with a grain of salt--or at least forgets it after a while.
  3. Nip it in the bud and deal with it as soon as possible before it takes root bo contacting the people who you think might have heard the rumors.
  4. Sue his ass (although I can't prove .
  5. Press charges.
The problem with some rumors, like the Richard Gere one, is that they become engrained in your mind and just don't go away... ever. One can end up like Jack Purdue.
 
Last edited:
You know what rec? I'm tired of this. Since no one's going to do this, I am. I'm going to put this out in the open.

YOU'VE told the same quasi-sordid story to at least 4 members that I know of. None of them asked to be told it and none of them should have been told it. It was none of their business and they ought not to have heard it. YOU told them anyway. YOU gossiped. They then possessed knowledge they shouldn't have had about not one but two other members. And they were concerned. Two of them then talked, expressed that concern, decided to contact one of those members, and all hell broke loose.

YOU are doing damage control. YOU are disparaging other members in order to try to protect yourself by inuendo. I sat at the table and heard the story. I totally get your game.

Where the truth lies about this story, I have no idea because the details have been different in each version. As Ex said, motive is everything, and I can't begin to know yours. I'm truly sorry to have to hit this send button but I simply can not watch this happen any more.
 
Last edited:
You know what rec? I'm tired of this. Since no one's going to do this, I am. I'm going to put this out in the open.

So...when someone accuses him of doing illegal and immoral activity...(I'm not talking about gossip, I'm talking about accusations that are akin to slander)...then he is supposed to do nothing? Since accusations are being made in private messages to selective members here, Rec is asking how to deal with that. What's inflamatory about that?

I don't get this post, its almost like you are talking about some other experience from two weeks ago that has been long resolved. I hope that is the case, otherwise, I think the man has the responsibility to deal with things being said about him.
 
So...when someone accuses him of doing illegal and immoral activity...(I'm not talking about gossip, I'm talking about accusations that are akin to slander)...then he is supposed to do nothing? Since accusations are being made in private messages to selective members here, Rec is asking how to deal with that. What's inflamatory about that?
I don't get this post, its almost like you are talking about some other experience from two weeks ago that has been long resolved. I hope that is the case, otherwise, I think the man has the responsibility to deal with things being said about him.

IMHO if it happens in PM, it needs to stay in PM. Starting a thread about it never solves the problem, no matter what it is. The person who starts the thread always ends up looking bad.
 
So...when someone accuses him of doing illegal and immoral activity...(I'm not talking about gossip, I'm talking about accusations that are akin to slander)...then he is supposed to do nothing? Since accusations are being made in private messages to selective members here, Rec is asking how to deal with that. What's inflamatory about that?

I don't get this post, its almost like you are talking about some other experience from two weeks ago that has been long resolved. I hope that is the case, otherwise, I think the man has the responsibility to deal with things being said about him.


I have no idea what you're talking about Ex, but you know exactly what I'm talking about. He had no business starting this snarky thread, any more than he did starting the Disclosure one. It's all about convoluted spin and headgames. I'm sorry; I like him but I don't like this at all.

Now I need to go enjoy my Thanksgiving. Please, you do too.
 
I have no idea what you're talking about Ex, but you know exactly what I'm talking about. He had no business starting this snarky thread, any more than he did starting the Disclosure one. It's all about convoluted spin and headgames. I'm sorry; I like him but I don't like this at all.

Now I need to go enjoy my Thanksgiving. Please, you do too.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Q F T
cigarbabe:saevil:
 
I have no idea what you're talking about Ex, but you know exactly what I'm talking about.

Yes, I do know what you are talking about, and you do not know what I am talking about.

I have a three and a half year reputation here, and my friends know that I'm not a hysterical poster. I am aware of the conversations in Ottawa last week, and the issue that was discussed there is long over. What I am concerned about is a more recent disclosure that was made in the time since this thread was started and will work its way through the system one way or another. You may, or may not ever learn about it...but its a truely troubling issue.

Whether you like his "convoluted spin and headgames" or not, he has the right to start threads as much as anyone else on here seeking advice he really wants.

Hope you enjoyed a pleasant Thanksgiving.
 
Ex, I truly have no beef with you. I have no beef with anyone. I've said what I had to say, I've done what I felt I had to do and it's over. You probably know rec and I have talked this out. I stand on my actions as relates to one particular issue only but I am absolutely not trying to insinuate myself into things that are not my concern.

That said, I also think some things are best conducted in private and that's a good deal of the reason I spoke up in the first place.

I had a great Thanksgiving and I hope you did as well, buddy.
 
It's cool. Thanks to this thread, it is now being dealt with, and in private. Progress is made.
 
Allrighty, then. Frankly, I don't think this thread had anything to do with it since the principals involved already knew what was going on and as you're all intelligent adults, I doubt you really gained any new-found wisdom here, but what do I know? :biggrin1:

As Anne of Green Gables once said, in the smarmiest way, "God's in his Heaven. All's right with the world."

Actually Nick the original source was Browning. I remember a paraphrase from The Thornbirds..."God is in his Woolhouse and all is right with the World"
:biggrin1:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Allrighty, then. Frankly, I don't think this thread had anything to do with it since the principals involved already knew what was going on and as you're all intelligent adults, I doubt you really gained any new-found wisdom here, but what do I know? :biggrin1:

As Anne of Green Gables once said, in the smarmiest way, "God's in his Heaven. All's right with the world."
Actually Nick, the original source was Browning. I remember a paraphrase from The Thornbirds..."God is in his Woolhouse and all is right with the World