Quote:
Originally Posted by rgcraig
LOL! I don't think you know what gossiping means.
|
I will ask the expert if i want to know all about it.
I would actuall say I am familiar with what gossip means in the bible, In the field of journalism and the vocabulary that covers it in the legal profession.
Quote:
|
The Hebrew word translated “gossip” in the Old Testament is defined as one who reveals secrets going about as a talebearer or scandal-monger. This is one who has gotten out of people secrets about themselves and their families, and then goes about telling his tales from house to house, to the great detriment of those whose secrets he is entrusted with, as well as to those to whom he tells them, as well as to his own. Gossip is distinguished from sharing information by its intent. The gossip-monger has as his goal building himself up by making others look bad and by exalting his superior knowledge of others.
|
Nosey folks wanting private info so they can add to it and pass it along.
1 Timothy 5:12–13 (NIV)
12 Thus they bring judgment on themselves, because they have broken their first pledge. 13 Besides, they get into the habit of being idle and going about from house to house. And not only do they become idlers, but also gossips and busybodies, saying things they ought not to.
sending e messages saves the feet.
Empirical gossip research has not coalesced into a mainstream approach. Most researchers are in accord that the term can apply to both positive and negative aspects of personal affairs and that, depending on the point of view, it can have positive or negative social effects. An early factionalism was reflected by the opposing views of Gluckman (1963), who maintained that gossip served the interests of the group, and Paine (1967), who countered that gossip was a tool wielded by individuals for personal advantage. Wilson, Wilczynski, Wells, and Weiser (2000), using evaluations of gossipy vignettes, showed that gossip that upheld group norms tended to reflect better on the gossipers (and more harshly on the targets) than self-serving gossip did. Studies have also focused on individual differences in gossip use, perception, and vulnerability (e.g., Davis & Rulon, 1935; Jaeger, Skleder, & Rosnow, 1998; Litman & Pezzo, 2005; Nevo, Nevo, & Derech Zehavi, 1993; Radlow & Berger, 1959).
. so if I study social networking analysis and see it's motives are to some extent detrimental to the target of the gossip, I can outline a plan for disintermediation or is simple words, preachers preach against it.
On blogs such as this one, informal gate keepers arise and there is a lot of activity. I earlier noted one gossip participant openly processing and adding to information to be conveyed to others.
I don't think people that gossip have the intuitive and introspective power to understand it's meaning.
A forum is the social equivalent of a lot of people sitting around the table with one another, taking turns talking. Everyone is present to hear what is said, therefore even if the conversation takes a personal turn, it is in the presence of the person concerned, ergo, it is not gossip. If, for instance, coadie is on one side of me at the table, and I turn to the person on the other side and say, "Coadie's wife is a SAHM", in a tone loud enough for him and everyone else to hear--that isn't gossip. (Obviously) He's sitting right there to respond, if my facts are wrong. 
Hybrid Mode
