GOSSIPIN THE MODERN AGE

2 Gossip in the Modern Age

Like most mobs, the one that pursued Megan Meier was cruel and unrelenting. Its members gathered on the social networking site

MySpace and called Megan a liar, fat and worse.

Megan, 13, fought back, insulting her tormenters with every profanity she knew. But the mob shouted her down, overwhelming her computer and her shaky self-confidence with a barrage of hateful instant messages.

“Mom, they’re being horrible!” Megan said, sobbing into the phone when her mother called. After an hour, Megan ran into her bedroom and hanged herself with a belt.

“She felt there was no way out,” Ms. Meier said.

Megan Meier’s suicide made headlines because she was the victim of a hoax. Lori Drew, another mother in the neighborhood, said in a police report that she had created a MySpace profile of a boy, an invention named “Josh Evans,” and that she and her daughter had manipulated Megan into thinking that this fabricated person liked her.

Then, after a few weeks, Ms. Meier said, girls posing as Josh wrote MySpace messages telling Megan that he hated her. He insulted her, and other girls

— most unaware that Josh did not exist — viciously piled on. (Later, through her lawyer, Ms. Drew, 48,

denied creating the MySpace page used in the hoax and denied knowledge of the final messages.)

In some ways, the hoax was a tragic oddity. Most mothers don’t pull vicious pranks, and few harassed adolescents become depressed and commit suicide. But Megan’s story is also a case study about

cyberbullying.

Cellphone cameras and text messages, as well as social networking Web sites, e-mail and instant messaging, all give teenagers a wider range of ways to play tricks on one another, to tease and to intimidate their peers.

And unlike traditional bullying, which usually is an intimate, if highly unpleasant, experience, high-tech bullying can happen anywhere, anytime, among lots of different children who may never actually meet in person. It is inescapable and often anonymous, said sociologists and educators who have

studied cyberbullying.

Even in this town, where Megan’s name is a constant reminder of the danger of the Web, adolescents say they love using the technology — and some do a little bullying of their own.

“I’m sure that every girl at this table has used cellphones or instant messaging to say something

When the Bullies Turned FacelessThe Suicide Of Megan Meier by Christopher Maag

Setting the Stage

“Unlike traditional bullying...high-tech bullying can happen anywhere, anytime.

3 Gossip in the Modern Age

mean about somebody,” said Victoria Fogarty, as she discussed bullying with six other adolescents. Victoria, 14, is the daughter of Pam Fogarty, the mayor of Dardenne Prairie, and an eighth grader at West Middle School, which Megan attended.

Other children are afraid of becoming the next victim.

“Once you’re on MySpace, you’re trapped,” said Jake Dobson, 12, a seventh grader at West Middle School.

“You spend all your time online just trying to keep the negative stuff about you from spreading.”

Megan Meier spent months begging for a MySpace page before her mother finally gave in. Ms. Meier thought that making friends online could be good for her daughter, a sensitive girl who craved an emotional connection.

But that neediness made Megan vulnerable. By the third grade Megan hated herself and talked of suicide, Ms. Meier said. The diagnosis was depression and attention deficit disorder, which meant Megan would receive weekly counseling and an evolving list of medications as treatment.

By the time she reached seventh grade at West Middle School, Megan was overweight but active, Ms. Meier said. She hung out with other volleyball players, who were in the second tier of popular girls, just beneath the soccer players, said Laura Rodgers, 14, Megan’s friend.

She aped the styles of those above her, Ms. Meier said. She favored clothes like Hollister and Abercrombie & Fitch. Sometimes she applied so much mascara that she resembled a raccoon. Occasionally she

would gleefully accept a soccer girl’s invitation to sit at the popular table during lunch, Laura said.

These moments of success faded during gym class, when Megan had to trade her plus-size designer clothes for athletic shorts and T-shirts. “People in P.E. class called her fat every day,” Laura said. “I’d see her in the locker room crying.”

After a difficult year, Megan’s parents transferred their daughter to Immaculate Conception Catholic School in Dardenne Prairie. The school had strict policies aimed at avoiding cliques. Students wear

uniforms, and they are assigned lunch tables so they can socialize with everybody.

“There aren’t really cliques there at all,” said Rachel Garzon, 14, who befriended Megan. “You might be closer friends with some people, but you can walk up and talk to anybody and they’ll be nice to you.”

…And, as in the Megan Meier case, the victim of cyberbullying is often isolated, yet never free from attack. “The target sees this entire cyberuniverse where

everybody is against them, and no one will come to their defense,” said Dr. Walter Roberts, professor of counselor education at Minnesota State University, Mankato. “The harassment is not limited to the portion of the day when the kids are in school. The targeted kids have no escape.”

Three years ago, before Megan’s suicide, the school system identified cyberbullying as a serious problem, said Kim Carter, assistant superintendent for student services in the Fort Zumwalt School District.

In 2005, the school surveyed students and teachers. And before and after Megan’s death, the district held

I’m sure that every girl at this table has used cellphones or instant messaging to say something mean about somebody.”“

4 Gossip in the Modern Age

a variety of assemblies, meetings and workshops to train students, parents, faculty and administrators how to recognize and react to cyberbullying.

While all the vigilance has helped, students say, cyberbullying remains common. Last month, a girl won $500 in a class raffle. Before her teacher even opened the door to excuse everyone, the rest of the school was abuzz with rumors that she had cheated, said Sarah Fogarty, another of the mayor’s children.

How was that possible? Cellphones are supposed to be turned off in school. Girls practice text messaging with their eyes closed, Sarah said. They’ve become adept at pressing buttons under their desks while keeping their focus on the teacher.

“I’m not good at it yet,” Sarah said.

This fall an unpopular boy started break dancing at a football game. People took cellphone photos and videos, which they immediately forwarded to hundreds of people. “They were egging him on because they wanted to keep making fun of him, and the photos made him look ridiculous,” said Jake

Dobson, the seventh grader.

Even popular kids feel vulnerable.

Ryan Franklin, 12, was a star player on his Little League baseball team until he needed stomach surgery last summer, said his mother, Sonya Franklin. As he recovered, a friend sent e-mail messages to dozens of students falsely stating that Ryan had made sexual

comments about a girl in class, Ms. Franklin said.

“The truth was that he’d stopped playing baseball and so he’d lost some of his status,”

Ms. Franklin said. “Some people started picking on him because he was an easier target.” The e-mail messages stopped only when she threatened to call the boy’s mother.

Jake Dobson admits he’s not above an instant message making fun of someone, even if he knows that the same thing could happen to him.

“It’s like I can’t even do anything because everybody is sitting there with a cellphone just waiting for me to mess up,” he said.

“It’s like I can’t even do anything because everybody is sitting there with a cellphone just waiting for me to mess up.”

▶ How has gossip and bullying changed with the Internet?

▶ Have you ever heard gossip about yourself? How did you react?Questions

to Consider?

5 Gossip in the Modern Age

The Dangers of Slander & The Value of Positive SpeechENGAGING THE TEXT

Leviticus 19:16Do not go around as a gossiper among your people. Do not stand idly by the blood of your friend…

Psalms: Chapter 3413 Who is the person who is eager for life, who desires years of good fortune?14 Guard your tongue from speaking evil, and your lips from deceitful speech.15 Avoid negativity and do good, seek serenity and pursue it.

ויקרא פרק יט פסוק טזלא תלך רכיל בעמיך לא תעמד על דם רעך אני ה׳

תהלים פרק לדיג מי האיש החפץ חיים אהב ימים לראות טוב:

יד נצר לשונך מרע ושפתיך מדבר מרמה:טו סור מרע ועשה טוב בקש שלום ורדפהו:

Talmud Arachin 15aRav Elazar ben Parta said: See how great the power of evil speech is! Where do we see this? From the story of the spies who spoke negatively about the land of Israel. Someone who speaks negatively about a land, which is just sticks and stone – and nevertheless the spies were punished – all the more so one needs to be extra careful not to speak negatively about a friend!

תלמוד בבלי מסכת ערכין דף טו עמוד א א״ר אלעזר בן פרטא: בוא וראה כמה גדול כח של לשון הרע, מנלן? ממרגלים,

ומה המוציא שם רע על עצים ואבנים כך, המוציא שם רע על חבירו על אחת כמה וכמה.

6 Gossip in the Modern Age

Pirkei Avot 1:17Shimon said: All of my days I grew up among the wise and did not find a better vessel than that of silence. Theoretics are not what is essential, rather it is action. And anyone who speaks excessively is bound to be bound towards sin.

משנה מסכת אבות פרק א משנה יז שמעון בנו אומר כל ימי גדלתי בין החכמים ולא מצאתי לגוף טוב

אלא שתיקה ולא המדרש הוא העיקר אלא המעשה וכל המרבה דברים מביא חטא.

רמב״ם הלכות דעות פרק ז הלכה ב אי זהו רכיל זה שטוען דברים והולך מזה לזה ואומר

כך אמר פלוני כך וכך שמעתי על פלוני אע״פ שהוא אמת הרי זה מחריב את העולם.

Rambam: Laws of WisdomWhat is a “peddler” [as described in the previous verse]? One who loads himself with things/words and carries them from one person to another, saying, “So-and-so said…”, or “I heard such-and-such about so-and-so.” Even if the gossip is true, this activity destroys the world.

▶ Why is someone who is eager for a good life described as someone who is careful with his speech? What is the connection?

▶ How does excessive speech lead to sin?

▶ What do you think it means that gossip can destroy the world?

Questions to Consider?

7 Gossip in the Modern Age

The Parameters of Gossip in Jewish LawENGAGING THE TEXT

Talmud Yoma 4bR’ Menasia says: From where do we learn that when one says something to his fellow, that other should not divulge the information? The verse states (Leviticus 1:1): And G d spoke to him [Moses] from the Tent of Meeting, saying…”

Rashi, ibid.THAT HE SHOULD NOT DIVULGE: The Torah says: “saying” [laymor] means lo emor (“do not say”), i.e., do not divulge the information unless the one who told it to you gives you permission.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא דף ד עמוד ב אמר רבי (מנסיא בר בריה דרבי מסיא משמיה דרבי מנסיא) רבה מניין לאומר דבר לחבירו שהוא בבל יאמר עד שיאמר לו לך אמור

שנאמר ״וידבר ה׳ אליו מאהל מועד לאמר״

רש״י ש״ם שהוא בבל יאמר כו׳ –

תלמוד לומר: לאמר - לא אמור הדברים אלא אם כן נותן לו רשות.

תלמוד בבלי מסכת ערכין דף טו עמוד בהיכי דמי לישנא בישא? אמר רבה כגון דאמר איכא נורא בי פלניא.

אמר ליה אביי: מאי קא עביד? גלויי מילתא בעלמא הוא! אלא דמפיק בלישנא בישא, דאמר: היכא משתכח נורא? אלא בי פלניא [דאיכא בשרא וכוורי.]

אמר רבה: כל מילתא דמיתאמרא באפי מרה, לית בה משום לישנא בישא. אמר ליה: כל שכן חוצפא ולישנא בישא! אמר ליה: אנא כרבי יוסי סבירא לי,

דאמר רבי יוסי: מימי לא אמרתי דבר וחזרתי לאחורי.

אמר רבה בר רב הונא: כל מילתא דמיתאמרא באפי תלתא, לית בה משום לישנא בישא;מ״ט? חברך חברא אית ליה, וחברא דחברך חברא אית ליה.

8 Gossip in the Modern Age

Talmud Arachin 15bWhat is classified as negative speech (lashon harah)?For example, a person says: “There is a fire cooking in so-and-so’s house”-this is considered negative because it is implying that so-and-so is a wealthy person who has a fire available in his house constantly to cook up food.Abaye asked: But what is wrong with saying that?! He is merely disclosing a fact that he happens to have a fire all day?!Rava responds: Rather, the example is where he verbalized clearly the negative speech by saying, “Where else can fire be found other than in so-and-so’s house who is always making and eating food?” (i..e. he’s implying the person is obsessed with food).

Rabbah said: Anything that is said in the presence of the person being discussed involved no prohibition on account of negative speech. Abaya objects: How can that be permitted? It should be considered even worse if the person being talked about is present?! It’s not only negative speech it’s also a chutzpah!Rabbah responds to Abaya: I concur with the view of Rav Yose, who said: In all my days I have never said something about someone and had to turn around to see if he was there, because I would have said the same thing even if he was there.

Rabbah bar Rav Hunah said: Anything that is said in the presence of three people or more can be assumed to become public knowledge and there is no prohibition of repeating it further once it becomes public knowledge

תוספות מסכת ערכין דף טו עמוד ב כל מילתא דמיתאמרא באפי תלתא לית בה משום לישנא בישא - פירוש

כגון כה״ג דנורא בי פלוני דאיכא למישמע דלא אמרה משום לישנא בישא אבל אםהוא אמר דבר קנטור על חבירו אפילו היה אומרה בפניו אית ביה משום לישנא בישא.

Tosfos, ibid.Anything that is said in front of three people or more is not prohibited - This only refers to the type of ambiguously negative speech that the Talmud cited initially (i.e. the case where you say a person has a fire burning in his house, which can either be taken as an implication that he is obsessed with food or very hospitable), only such things can be said in the presence of three because if he said it in front of so many people one can assume he intended for the positive implication. But if the statement is unambiguously negative and clearly intended to hurt then it is prohibited to repeat even if it has become public knowledge.

9 Gossip in the Modern Age

ResponsaThe primary prohibition of accepting the words of negative speech refers to how you look at the person once you have heard the words. That you must not change the way you interact of deal with the person you heard negative things about and it needs to appear as if you heard nothing at all – even if, since you are clearly not an angel, after hearing the words it did internally affect you a little.

Sefer Chofetz Chaim: The Laws of Lashon HaraOne who has a deceased person in front of him is relieved of the Mitzva to say It is biblically prohibited to accept words of negativity whether the words are directed at God or at man, meaning one cannot believe that the words they are hearing are true for through that they will come to look at the subject derogatorily.

שו״ת תשובות והנהגות חלק א׳ תקנה ועיקר איסור קבלת לשון הרע הוא לאחר השמיעה –

שלא ישתנה אצלו היחס לחברו כלל וליהוי כאילו לא שמע שלגבי חבירו אינו חושש כללאף אם לעצמו אינו כמלאכי השרת שברור לו.

ספר חפץ חיים הלכות אסורי לשון הרע אסור לקבל לשון הרע מן התורה, בין שהוא מהדברים שבין אדם למקום, או מהדברים

שבין אדם לחברו, דהינו שלא נאמין בלבנו שהספור הוא אמת, כי על ידי זה יבזה בעינינו, מי שנאמר עליו. ואפלו אם לא יסכים לו בפרוש לספורו, דאי לאו הכי,

הרי הוא שונה את העון בכפלים, שהוא מספר ומקבל. והמקבל עובר בא תעשה, שנאמר, ״לא תשא שמע שוא״. ואמרו חכמינו ז״ל במכילתא, שזו היא אזהרה למקבל לשון הרע, ולבד שאר לאוין ועשיןהמצטרפים לזה, כמו שכתוב

לעיל בפתיחה, עין שם.

▶ What would be an example of ambiguous negative speech? What would be an example of clear and direct negative speech?

▶ Why would it be prohibited to discuss something negative if it already has become public knowledge?

▶ Once one has heard something negative about someone how can they continue to deal with them the same way? What would be a real life example of this?

Questions to Consider?

10 Gossip in the Modern Age

Case Studies in the Laws of Gossip: What Do You Think?ENGAGING THE TEXT

The following question was posed to Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, Chief Sefardic Rabbi (Responsa Yechava Daas 4:60)

In 1972, the Democratic party nominated Thomas Eagleton as its vice presidential candidate. The press soon revealed that Eagleton had been hospitalized three times for depression, and had twice been given shock treatments. Was the voting public entitled to know this? Many people argued that voters should be informed that a man who might become president had twice suffered nervous breakdowns. A significant minority contend, however, that people have an absolute right to have their medical and psychological history kept confidential (as a result of the Eagleton episode, they add, politicians who need to speak to psychiatrist might now fear to do so).

▶ What would you have done?Questions to Consider?

CASE STUDY #1The Vice Presidential Candidate Who Was Forced To Resign

CASE STUDY #2The Opthamologist & The Department Of Motor Vehicles

שו״ת יחווה דעת חלק ד סימן ס ד״ה שאלה: המשתדל

שאלה: המשתדל להשיג רשיון נהיגה, והוא חולה במחלה סמויה שאינה מתגלית על ידי בדיקת רופא רגילה. האם מותר לרופאו האישי או למי שיודע בבירור על מחלתו,

להודיע על כך למשרד הרישוי, למנוע בעדו השגת הרשיון בכדי שלא יגרום לתאונות ואסונות בנהיגתו, או שמא יש בזה איסור משום רכילות ולשון הרע.

11 Gossip in the Modern Age

The QuestionOne who is applying for his driver’s license but has a serious seeing impediment that a regular doctor cannot detect, is it permissible for his ophthalmologist who knows of the condition to alert the Department of Motor Vehicles in order to prevent this person from getting a driver’s license? Or is this prohibited because it is considered gossip and negative speech?

שו״ת יחווה דעת חלק ד סימן ס ד״ה תשובה: נאמר ומכל מקום נראה שכל זה הוא באופן שמתכוין רק להשמיץ את חבירו ולבזותו,

אבל אם מתכוין לתועלת מסויימת או להרחיק נזק מותר. וראיה לזה ממה שכתב הרמב״ם )בפרק א׳ מהלכות רוצח הלכה יד( וזו לשונו: כל היכול להציל את חבירו

ואינו מצילו, עובר על לא תעמוד על דם רעך, לפיכך הרואה את חבירו טובע בים או שלסטים באים עליו, ויכול להצילו, או ששמע שאנשים חושבים עליו רעה

וטומנים לו פח, ולא גילה אוזן חבירו להודיעו, הרי זה עובר על מה שנאמר בתורה לא תעמוד על דם רעך. ע״כ... ואף הרופא שמוזהר על חוק הסודיות הרפואית

, באופן שכזה מצוה עליו להודיע למשרד הרישוי, ואין בזה שום חשש איסור כלל וכלל.

ובזה יש לפרש גם כן כוונת הפסוק, לא תלך רכיל בעמך, לא תעמוד על דם רעך, שאף על פי שאסור לך להיות רכיל, ולגלות סוד חבירך, וכמו שנאמר: הולך רכיל

מגלה סוד ונאמן רוח מכסה דבר, מכל מקום לא תעמוד על דם רעך, ועליך להודיע לחבירך כדי שישמר מנזק וסכנה, וכמו שאמרו במסכת נדה )סא ע״א(, שאף על פי

שאסור לקבל לשון הרע, למיחש מיהא בעי. והרמב״ם בספר המצות (מצות לא תעשה רצ״ז) כתב, שבכלל אזהרת לא תעמוד על דם רעך, הרואה ממון חבירו אובד, והוא יכול למנוע זאת כשיגלה אוזן חבירו על כך. וכמו שאמרו בתורת כהנים, מנין שאם

אתה יודע עדות לחבירך שאין אתה רשאי לשתוק, תלמוד לומר לא תעמוד על דם רעך . וכן כתב בספר החינוך )מצוה רמ״ד(. וראה עוד בברכי יוסף חושן משפט )סימן כ״ח( , ובספר שער משפט שם, ובהעמק שאלה פרשת ויקרא )סימן סח סוף סק״ב(, ובשו״ת

משכנות יעקב )חלק חושן משפט סימן י״ב(. ולפי זה יוצא שגם כשיש הפסד ממון בלבד רשאי לגלות אוזן חבירו, כדי להשמר מהחושבים עליו רעה. וכל שכן כאן שיש חשש

סכנה ליחיד ולרבים. )וראה בחידושי הרשב״א שבת מ״ד ע״א

The AnswerAfter citing many of the sources describing the severity of gossip and negative speech Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef writes as follows:Nevertheless it appears to me that negative speech is only problematic when the intention is to malign and embarrass your friend. However, if the clear intention is to remove a clear danger that such speech is permissible. And as a proof to this Maimonides writes that whoever is able to save his friend from harm and abstains violates the prohibition of standing idly by your friend….In fact in this light we can explain the verse that contains the prohibition of negative speech. The verse

12 Gossip in the Modern Age

▶ In what other situations do you think it would be permissible to reveal a secret or say negative speech?

▶ What do you think the parameters of “danger” should be that would allow one to speak negatively?

Questions to Consider?

starts by says “Do not go around as a gossiper among your people,” and concludes by saying, “Do not stand idly by the blood of your friend.” These two statements are juxtaposed in the Torah in order to reinforce that even though negative speech and revealing secrets is prohibited, nevertheless one may not stand idly by the blood of his brother, and one is responsible to reveal words that can prevent clear danger.