Tuesday 9 September 2014

Morals blog: 9th Commandment - applied to facebook and tweets

Do Not Spread Rumours

As I said last post, the 9th Commandment “Do not give false testimony against your neighbour” was primarily about under-girding an honest, fair and effective justice system. It clearly also had an immediate application to what we might call “the court of public opinion”. People can be harmed, their livelihood stripped away, even killed by gossip and rumour.

Writing about the Bible's high view of proper law courts I did not quote chapter-and-verse because it seemed to me that on even a cursory reading of the Bible it was emerged as almost a “self evident truth”. However for the extension of the 9th Commandment to gossip and slander I shall provide a few quotes.

Exodus 23 combines both ideas as well as pointing out the temptation to “say what everyone else is saying” plus the twin temptations to play favourites either for or against the poor.:

Do not spread false reports. Do not help a guilty person by being a false witness. Do not follow the crowd in doing wrong. When you give testimony in a lawsuit, do not pervert justice by siding with the crowd, and do not show favouritism to a poor person in a lawsuit.” … “Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits.”

In Mark 7.27 Jesus lists slander as one of the evil things that originate in a human heart and separate that person from God.

1 Corinthians 6 lists slander as one of the sins-of-habit that mark a person who will not enter heaven. This should scare us a great deal more than it does! It should trouble us all the more when a word search for “slander” in the New Testament turns up frequent calls for Christians to stop doing it – indicating that it was an active temptation in the young churches, and even fears as in 2 Corinthians 12:20 that it could be rife in a congregation.

So my understanding of New Testament teaching is that slander is a serious evil, yet one so attractive to our human nature that even (or possibly especially) in a close community-of-faith, it will be a constantly recurring problem.

It has certainly been my experience that gossip and slander are not only rife at every level in Christian churches and communities, but that it is one of the few bid sins that is seldom challenged.

Today's Christians, from the pew to the episcopate, seem to have cut the commands against gossip and slander out of their minds and out of their Bibles. We really need to change this!

In a society where even the churches, who aught to be guardians of morals, have so disastrously failed, it is not surprising that slander and false accusation are running rampant.

Small-town gossips did a lot of harm, but it was limited by propinquity. In a small secular community the effect of gossip was moderated by these two facts: you actually knew the target as a person and you had strict social conventions.

It is again “sociology 1.01” that in small towns people do gossip about each other but do not in general let that gossip influence their behaviour. The classic illustration is this: Two ladies are tearing apart the character of lady Number 3 with vicious gossip. Lady 3 approaches. They immediately break off their gossip, turn, smile, and greet her like a long lost sister. It is not hypocrisy, just beneficial social convention which has evolved so that humans can co-exist in groups, kicking in.

Of course there is a limit to what situations this convention can save. Lynch mobs, witch hunts, single mothers being hounded out of town are all historic reminders of that. However my point is only that in a small community social conventions gave some protection.

Also this benefit does not exist in religious communities and the like – in sociological terms what they foster is not “community” but “communion” which is a very different thing! They also make “The Faith” in whatever terms they understand it as paramount and so are prone to doing a great deal of evil in the name of protecting it!

Secondly in the village community, the target of gossip was a person you knew. This did not always save them . But often it did. The classic example is the person who says: “Jews may be (whatever the latest propaganda said) … but Isaac next door – well he is not like that!” You knew Isaac, he was a person.

Once again historically the failures of this are obvious – in Rwanda for instance pastors who were of the Hutu tribe betrayed and even themselves murdered men, women and children of their own congregations who were of the Tutsi tribe. Human evil is a truly frightening thing! So again my point is only that social proximity affords some protection.

Today in this “global village” we touch via technology people we do not know personally, and towards whom the old conventions of village behaviour do not apply. Little wonder slander is rearing its ugly head as a bis problem.

Technology has made it so easy to hurt a human being we do not know.

A person can be demonised in a face-book post. A touch of the finger is all it takes to “like” the slander on our page. Little wonder these can “go viral”.

The target is not a person we know – just a “thing” we want to hate. The target has no chance to tell us their side of the story: we have become judge, jury and executioner without even hearing counter evidence. This is a terrible travesty of justice.

Twitter can do the same. I don't do or read twitter. However from news reports there are people who see themselves as moulders of public opinion who tweet prolifically. Again rash, intemperate, unfair and possibly baseless slander trips easily off their fingertips. An instant of rage or even just pique and the tweet multiplies. Like a social version of a nuclear chain reaction these bombs go off.

This scourge of slander-on-steroids must be defeated.

The solution I put forward is a person-by-person choice for us not to do evil by “following the crowd in doing wrong”. Plus a person-by-person choice to radiate disapproval to those who do.


I likened tweets and facebook slander to nuclear chain reactions. In my younger days I did study nuclear engineering. A nuclear reactor can be shut down by introducing material that absorbs neutrons but does not multiply them and does not bounce them back into the ring. People can do that with gossip.

No comments:

Post a Comment