Difference between revisions of "Gossip"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(deleted liberal bias in explaining term)
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Gossip is "idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others."<ref>http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gossip</ref>
 
Gossip is "idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others."<ref>http://mw1.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gossip</ref>
  
−
Gossip is widely considered to be ethically wrong or sinful to the extent it:
+
When used with negative semantic connotations, gossip is considered to be ethically wrong or religiously sinful to the extent it:
  
 
*damages the reputation of the object of the gossip
 
*damages the reputation of the object of the gossip
Line 7: Line 7:
 
*wastes time and distracts from productive endeavors
 
*wastes time and distracts from productive endeavors
  
−
Leading publications of gossip include the ''National Enquirer''. [[Wikipedia]] is a leading purveyor of gossip on the [[internet]].
+
Leading publications of gossip include the ''National Enquirer''. [[Wikipedia]] is allegedly a leading purveyor of gossip on the [[internet]], although it has been argued that the nature of Wikipedia as a resource for a wide range of subject matters means that this is inevitable.
  
 
== References ==
 
== References ==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>
 
[[category:religion]]
 
[[category:religion]]

Revision as of 14:04, September 19, 2007

Gossip is "idle talk or rumor, esp. about the personal or private affairs of others."[1]

When used with negative semantic connotations, gossip is considered to be ethically wrong or religiously sinful to the extent it:

  • damages the reputation of the object of the gossip
  • perpetrates or encourages injustice or lack of charity towards others
  • wastes time and distracts from productive endeavors

Leading publications of gossip include the National Enquirer. Wikipedia is allegedly a leading purveyor of gossip on the internet, although it has been argued that the nature of Wikipedia as a resource for a wide range of subject matters means that this is inevitable.

References