tattling & ettiquette question

[Janx]

Very recently, I've had several different friends involved in very similar social situations where someone tattled on somebody else. None of this involved myself, merely something I heard about from the parties involved.

I am curious as to what y'all generally think about the right or wrongness of it, and if there is any precedent for documenting the proper protocol for such a situation (a Miss Manners quote perhaps).

Here's the framework of the situation:

Person A tells topic X about person B to person C
Person C decides to tell Person B what was said by Person A
Person B gets mad at Person A
Person A is now mad at Person C for blabbing

Regardless of any moral wrongness on the part of Person A, if their intent was not to have anybody mad, they failed, and effectively the first mistake was on their part.

Seperate from that, I am curious as whether Person C did the right thing.

Is it OK to tell somebody what was said about them (or what impacts them)?

Does the nature of Topic X matter in the answer?

Examples of Topic X (if it matters):
I think Person B is ugly/unpleasant
I think Person B is bad at their job
I blame Person B for what went wrong (and Person B was at fault)
I blame Person B for what went wrong (and Person B was NOT at fault)
I blame Person B for what went wrong (and Person A was ACTUALLY at fault)
Person B's spouse is cheating on them
I'm going to do something bad to Person B
I think Person B did somethhing bad

Anyway, let's see what people think, and see if anybody knows any documented sources for "best practices" etiquette-wise.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Most of your examples I wouldn't consider tattling per se, as much as it would be gossip. Tattling implies that someone did something ethically, morally, or legally wrong or dubious. In your list of examples, I don't think any really qualify as tattling. Most are simply opinions that you've expressed, possibly not in confidence. That makes them more in the realm of gossip than tattling.

There's no best practices, because the situation is always dependent on the context. In all of the instances I can think of, there's a couple of major points that I would look at.

First of all is evidence. Is there proof that what Person A is saying about Person B is true? There's a fairly fine line between "tattling" and "defamation". It's one thing to accuse someone of taking office supplies, and another to have proof of it.

Second of all is scope. Scope is something of a tricky issue, and quite possibly depends on the people involved. As a baseline, I would say that anything that could result in legal proceedings* rests outside of "tattling" and into "report of a crime". It's one thing if an employee takes one sheet of paper home from the office, it's another if they are taking reams of paper and the printer.

Another major point to look at is intent. Why is Person A telling someone about Action B? Tattling, to me, seems to be more rooted in spite than anything else. There are other reasons to tell on people - moral obligation, ethical objection, illegality, protection, friendship - all of these are very separate from spite. It's one thing to tell on someone taking office supplies simply because you want their job; it's another to tell on someone because it's illegal, or because you want to protect the company.

So, in the rest of the examples you posted:

Telling someone about infidelity generally wouldn't be considered tattling. Ethically speaking, you really shouldn't tell someone about it unless you saw it personally or had concrete proof. The intent may not always be ethically pure, but in general I think in general a majority of people have a moral objection to infidelity. There's also an element of protection in it - aside from the obvious (STDs and such), there's also financial stuff to worry about (ie, man using pooled money for cheating). As for the scope, it's not illegal but again there's usually a strong moral objection to it that most people would find outside the scope of tattling.

Future intent is tricky in that you need to gauge if someone is just venting or if they are seriously considering something. It's also tricky because the scope is a little more difficult to gauge. For example, if I hear someone talking about keying someone's car, I might not say anything until after it happens. There's no immediate threat to someone's health and the car will still be functional if it happens.

If you think that someone did something bad, the important part is evidence. This boils down to reasonable cause; is there reason to suspect that something bad did happen? If it's for nothing more than a gut feeling, then at best it's a lucky guess, and at worst it will be a defamation lawsuit against you. On the other hand, if you've noticed stuff going missing and you see Person B acting suspiciously, then you may want to bring it to someone's attention. However, even in that instance, implicating Person B may not be the correct thing to do. After all, all the proof is coincidental. There are people who are trained to investigate these things, and it's usually best to report any suspicions to them.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Examples of Topic X (if it matters):
I think Person B is ugly/unpleasant
I think Person B is bad at their job
I blame Person B for what went wrong (and Person B was at fault)
I blame Person B for what went wrong (and Person B was NOT at fault)
I blame Person B for what went wrong (and Person A was ACTUALLY at fault)
Person B's spouse is cheating on them
I'm going to do something bad to Person B
I think Person B did somethhing bad

AFAIK, the Dear Abby response to at least the above highlighted topic is overwhelmingly Mind Your Own Business. I believe that such a response is in fact the most appropriate for the entire situation regardless of the topic.

Unless we are talking about criminal wrongdoing what we have here is gossip. It is unseemly enough to START gossip by speaking ill of others behind their backs. It's as bad or worse to pass it on, and as the old adage goes: NOBODY likes a tattle-tale.

 

[Janx]

From a strictly tactical standpoint, A made several mistakes, one of which was not being certain of the allegiance of C to B. Generally, it's a bad idea to bad mouth the friend of C to C.

On the "Mind your own business" point, I think thats overly simplisitic given the complex nature of human relationships.

Firstly, C may be an involuntary participant. If A and C are friends and are talking, and A starts ranting about B, suddenly C has been forced into being a keepr of secrets.

Nextly, what is C to do when questioned directly by B about the topic? C may feel they have no choice but to sharre the information, espeically given a friendship.


To be a little less vague, one of the incidents appears to have occurred as follows:

A, B and C are all friends. A introduced B to C.
B & C have been hanging out more, as A has been unavailable for many months
A asked B and C to go with A to get a Tatoo.
Months earlier, B and D had advised against the specific Tattoo.
A had a fair amount to drink that night
A, B, and C visited 2 shops that B would recommend.
the 2 shops were unavailable to do the job
B pointed out there was a 3rd shop across the highway and that B knew nothing else about it
A, B & C went to the 3rd shop
A got the tattoo that A asked for
the tattoo was a bad design and done poorly
A few weeks later, A tells C that A is mad at B for recommending the shop and tattoo.
A has also been acting rudely to C and B at times during this phase
Slightly later B asks C if there's anything wrong with A
C, having been slighted again by A and feeling awkward the whole time since hearing this news from A, confides in B what was told.


That's really hard to write without using genders and pronouns, BTW.

Now I know all 3 parties. I had not heard from A on any of this, or since before this all began.
I know that C really did not like hearing A talk bad about B, especially as it contradicted what C witnessed that night.
I know that A is bi-polar and had several instances of rudely treating both B and C (which after that night was all by telephone)
I know that B was sensing something was off in the relationship with A since that night
I don't think C did it for spite, so much as tired of holding back this information and feeling bad about it as B was wondering what was going on.

Since the revelation, B and C decided to stop talking to A, as it seemed that A only called when A wanted something, and never expressed interest in them.

Yesterday, A finally actually left a voice mail, asking if anything was wrong. So B finally called back and explained. Later that day, B & C hung out for a bit with A, and A gave C the cold shoulder.

Apparently A is mad at C for blabbing.

I'm inclined to think that A put C in a position that A had no right to, therefore C may have had a right or obligation to reveal to B.

To my mind, it's certainly a grey area, hence why I was curious to both what people think, and to what so called "experts" think.

 

[Jdvn1]

All these letters are confusing...

In general, I think one should avoid these sorts of situations as much as possible. The exception is to protect someone.

 

[Janx]

I suspect that life doesn't let you avoid these situations, as they are inflicted upon you by others.

Basically, if you are being talked to, you don't have full control over what's being said to you, and before you know it, you are in C's position.

 

[Jdvn1]

But, in C's position, saying/doing nothing is the best you can do to stay out of it. Or, make a comment like, "I don't really feel comfortable talking about B behind his/her back." Or, defend the person being talked about.

Either way, A is entitled to his opinion.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Generally speaking, I keep my mouth shut.

However, as an attorney, if someone (who is not my client) reveals knowledge of, participation in, or that someone is about to commit certain criminal acts, I may be required by law to report it. Other professions have similar obligations. Usually, the acts involve imminent danger of bodily harm or death to others or to the actor's own person, conspiracy, acts upon a child or elderly person, and so forth.

As for the "Person B's spouse is cheating on them" question?

I understand Abby's position, but in this day & age, I can't agree with it. There are too many diseases out there; too many other acts- some of which are criminal- that are often committed in conjunction with infidelity for me to remain silent. There is simply too much risk of harm to the aggrieved party- physical, mental or financial- for silence to be the ethical position.

At least for me, that is.

 

[Thornir Alekeg]

I'm with LightPhoenix that the phrase tattling implies spite. My own recent encounter with tattling, involving one of my children is an example of this. My son went and did something he knew I had told him he was not to do without an adult present. Two the neighborhood girls rang my doorbell to tell me that he had done this. I thanked them for informing me, but also explained to them that they were in fact being tattle-tales and that was not a very nice thing to do. The reason I knew they were being tattle-tales was I heard them say to each other, prior to ringing the doorbell, "Let's go tell his dad and get him in trouble!"

As for most of the situations described, when I personally end up in these situations, for me it is very dependant upon the specific situation and the relationship I have with the people involved. My main thing is if I see somebody being all nice to another person when they are present, but are saying things like these behind their back. I may advise the person being talked about that the person talking about them may not be the most sincere person, and they should be wary.

 

[Janx]

I couldn't find a better word for tattling to use in the subject line

regarding children, there's the old adage "no one likes a tattle tale"

kids don't like getting told on when they do bad things, because of course they get punished

so they don't like the tattler

some kids seem to get off on getting others in trouble (they are getting attention)

adults don't like tattlers, because up until that point, they were unaware of a problem, and now they have to do something.

the problem with that mentality, is it discourages people from turning in criminals, potentially raising our kids to not get involved in stopping bad people.

On the adult side, it seems as I surmised, complicated and dependent on the relationships between the participants.