The Reminder is making its archives back to 2003 available on our website. Please note that, due to technical limitations, archive articles are presented without the usual formatting.
When you work in the media, you never know what to expect when your phone rings. It could be anyone from the government spokesman you called about a story three days ago to someone trying to sell you encyclopedias (yes, we get those, too). But I was completely unprepared for the call I received one windy afternoon last fall. I had literally just put the phone down from ordering lunch when our secretary buzzed to say that line two was for me. I answered to hear a woman's very frantic, very hurt voice on the other end. She asked whether I would write an article about her. I asked her for some details. That only made the voice more painful. Over the next few minutes, this unknown lady proceeded to tell me all about a vicious bit of gossip making the rounds. She was being accused of something as ridiculous as it was unsavoury. And while this alleged incident would mean nothing in a court of law, the Court of Public Opinion is another creature entirely. This poor woman had heard this rumour so often from so many people that she decided the only way to get the truth out was to present her side of the story in the paper. At this point I felt compelled to ask for the caller's name with my assurance it would not be shared. It turned out I not only knew her, but knew her quite well. Immediately the idea of this juicy gossip being true seemed as likely as Flinty streaking at the next Trout Festival. Now we both felt a little more comfortable. I told her what I had known all along, that a story of this nature would be inappropriate and only draw more attention to an unseemly situation. The hurt remained in her voice, but she understood. As a reporter, you learn to pay attention only to facts, both in and out of the office. This job has certainly made me more skeptical of things, but in a good way. There aren't many beliefs to which I subscribe unless I have some proof. My conversation last fall, as brief as it may have been, reiterated the importance of this practice, especially when innocent people's reputations are at stake. Let's face it, our community is terrible for rumours. "So-and-so is cheating on so-and-so" or "so-and-so was arrested for such-and-such" are the orders of the day. I was browsing Facebook.com a few weeks back and even saw a site dedicated to debunking Flin Flon gossip. Not a bad idea! We've gotten into such a habit of trying to make other people's business our business that any rumour floating around is often accepted as fact, no matter how preposterous or vulgar. And as I learned during that phone call, all of this gossip hurts. It hurts our fellow citizens trying to go about their daily lives. It degrades everyone connected to the grapevine by making them part of an apparatus that harms their neighbours. When people approach me with some sensational rumour about someone, the first thing I ask is whether they've actually talked to the person in question (they never have). From now on, I'll probably ask them how they would feel if the Court of Public Opinion was convicting them without a trial. Local Angle runs Fridays.
