“One of the things I’m starting to think about is that serious people just don’t think that gossip, the spécialité de ma maison, is serious. It’s always been regarded as some devious woman’s trick, some shallow callow shameful way of grasping situations without being in on the top conferences with the serious men. Gossip has always been considered tsk tsk. Only how are people like me – women they’re called – supposed to understand things if we can’t get in the V.I.P. room?” – Eve Babitz, edited by Lili Anolik in Didion & Babitz.
Today’s post focuses on Whisper Network by Chandler Baker. Whisper Network is a novel about sexual harassment in the workplace, and the “whisper networks” (or informal channels of communication among women in the office) that women use to warn one another of known harassers in their place of work.
Whisper Network by Chandler Baker
Whisper Network, authored by a corporate attorney, tells the story of four women working as in-house attorneys at a large, fictional sporting goods company called Truviv. The book starts with the news that the company’s CEO has recently passed away, and the legal department’s General Counsel (these four women’s boss), Ames Garrett, will likely become the new CEO. Ames is known amongst these four women (and the company’s larger “whisper network”) as a rabid sexual harasser, and the news of his potential promotion is alarming.
Early in the novel, we learn that one of these four women, Sloane Grover, had a sexual relationship with Ames many years prior. Although the reader is unclear of the details at first, we slowly learn that the relationship included non-consensual sexual conduct, an abuse of power, and retaliation after Sloane ended the relationship: “It was never the fault of Ames. If there were ever an issue at work, Sloane was, according to him, ‘irrational,’ ‘hypersensitive,’ ‘ridiculous,’ and even, once, ‘hormonal,’ Funny how those words had never come up before she’d slept with him.”
Sloane never reported any of these issues. When the new, younger attorney Katherine Bell joins the team, however, Sloane and her friends and coworkers Ardie Valdez and Grace Stanton notice Ames giving Katherine disproportionate attention, inviting her out to drinks, and holding many closed-door meetings with her in his office. The women start to worry that Katherine has now become Ames’s new target.
Simultaneously, Sloane starts to hear whispers among other women at the company referring to a mysterious list of men. Sloane reaches out to former coworker Elizabeth Moretti – a champion gossip – who tells her that a list has been circulating across the city, compiling the names of all known sexual harassers or assaulters. The list is meant to warn the Dallas women of these men: “Perhaps nosiness was a biological adaptation. Survival of the most informed.”
When the Truviv women hear of the list, they are intrigued; they contemplate the ethics of circulating such a list, and then wonder whether they have a duty to add Ames to the list, especially as the concerns around Ames and Katherine appear to be escalating.
Later in the novel, Sloane’s personal trainer Oksana, who works at the company gym, tells Sloane that the trainers at the gym also have their own version of “the list”: “’First, we hire female receptionists. Only female receptionists. That’s key… If a client becomes a problem… we ask the receptionist to highlight his name with yellow in the computer file. If that client requests evening or early morning training, the receptionist tells him that the female trainers are booked up or have off. If a problem client gets too out of hand, we code him red. And if that’s the case, all the female trainers become too busy to work with him at all.’” Most importantly, Oksana also tells Sloane that Ames has been on their list. Although Sloane was initially unsure whether Ames’s behavior had impacted any other employees (other than her), she quickly learns that it had.
At the very start of the novel, the reader also learns that another death at Truviv has occurred (aside from that of the CEO): a company employee has just fallen (or perhaps was pushed?) from the 18th story office balcony. The novel is formatted such that every few chapters is followed by an excerpt from a legal deposition, police investigation, or internal company investigation into the death of this employee. When some of the story’s main characters later decide to sue Truviv and Ames for sexual harassment, these legal interludes also start to include excerpts from depositions, internal interviews, and media reporting into the sexual harassment suit.
Ultimately, as the story progresses, we learn that many of the company’s women (and even many of the women in this small friend group) have had their own experiences with Ames, whether it be sexual harassment, sexual assault, retaliation, or a general abuse of power. As often happens with these types of cases, the information presented at the start of the novel was just the tip of the iceberg.
Implicit Bias and Sexual Harassment in the Workplace
While this novel reads as a fast-paced murder mystery, it is primarily a novel about sexual harassment in the workplace, written by an attorney about attorneys. Although the story focuses primarily on these four women, many of the chapters start with a collective narrative voice reflecting the general experience of women in their workplace: “We never cried at work, almost never, although when we did cry, once at home or maybe before that, in the car with our sunglasses on as we corkscrewed slowly down through the parking garage floors, it was usually about work. Everything was about work, even the things that weren’t: Would we continue to work after children? Would we put our work goals ahead of having a family? Were we working enough? Were we working too much? Were we being paid the amount our work was worth? What were we doing this weekend, did we want to have brunch or did we have to work?”
Here, as also discussed in my earlier post on Claudia Rankine and the Power of Art, the narration juxtaposes the individual experiences of these four women, with the collective experience of the many women in this workplace (and, presumably, many other workplaces). In the introductory dedication of the book, the author writes: “For every woman who shared her story with me or with the world, and for every woman who fueled the collective voice within these pages and a movement that demands to be witnessed, we hear you.” In an Author’s Note at the end of the novel, Baker discusses her own experiences with sexual harassment in the workplace, and how she “reaped the benefit of [her] first whisper network when [she] was a summer associate at a law firm.” Baker also explains how in writing her novel, she reached out to many different women including friends, former classmates, and former coworkers, whose stories all contributed to the book’s collective “we.” Baker writes, “As women shared their stories with me, writing Whisper Network became a quasi-whisper network of its own. I look forward to sharing this book with readers who I hope will continue to expand the network in new ways.”
This collective voice, inspired by many real-life accounts from women in the author’s network, reflects on the experience of sexual harassment, and the sometimes confusing gradation of abusive conduct in the workplace: “We dismissed some behavior – we could take a dirty joke. Others – the men who made points to tell us about their open marriages, who followed us into restrooms, who sent explicit text messages and then claimed to be too drink to remember, who didn’t hear the word ‘no,’ who retaliated when they did, who groped our assess – we couldn’t. We thanked God it wasn’t us. And when it was, we felt a sick sense of comfort that it wasn’t only us, a relief like having just vomited after a hangover.” As discussed in earlier posts on implicit bias, prejudice, discrimination and harassment exist on a spectrum. While some lower-level, biased behaviors may be brushed off – “we dismissed some behavior…” – these behaviors can easily escalate to more severe conduct if left unchecked.
In Whisper Network, readers learn of Ames’s very severe conduct (including rape and attempted rape); however, readers also learn of his less severe, more subtly biased conduct, all of which exist on a spectrum of sexual harassment in the workplace: “So when we said that we would prefer not to have to be asked to smile on top of working, we meant that: we would like to do our jobs, please. When we said that we would like not to hear a comment about the length of our skirt, we meant that: we would like to do our jobs, please. When we said that we would like not to have someone try to touch us in our office, we meant that: we would like to do our jobs. Please.” Again, this quote perfectly illustrates the gradation of sexual harassment or gender-based conduct, from seemingly innocuous (yet highly biased and gendered) comments telling women to “smile,” to more severe instances of non-consensual, sexual touching. And, as also discussed in prior posts, it is important for employers to respond to all degrees of potential bias or discrimination, as employers have a duty to prevent potentially unlawful conduct in the workplace, and these lower levels of the spectrum can quickly escalate to more severe degrees of harassment.
Whisper Network and Gossip
Throughout the novel, we see the immense impact of gossip and whisper networks, primarily through the friendships and alliances formed by the female employees: Sloane, Ardie and Grace discuss their concerns about Katherine and Ames, and how they can protect Katherine from Ames; Sloane learns from Oksana that she and the other trainers have a way of warning each other about problematic male employees, and that they have warned each other about Ames; and Sloane ultimately learns of the infamous list by overhearing other female employees talking in the gym.
With the list, however, we also see the potential complexity, controversy and backlash associated with these types of “whisper networks.” On one hand, the list could have protected female employees from known harassers or abusers, and served as a positive information-sharing mechanism. On the other hand, however, the list – which was publicly circulated – raises serious questions about due process, fairness, and even defamation, issues that are paramount when conducting a workplace or school investigation.
Indeed, when conducting a workplace or school investigation, the investigator must comply with due process by allowing the respondent (or accused) a full opportunity to respond to the allegations and to furnish evidence in support of his/her defense; the investigation must be balanced and fair, treating each party equally; and the investigation must be thorough, neutral, and reliable enough to ward off potential defamation lawsuits. As California case law has shown us, a botched investigation can expose an employer to successful and costly defamation lawsuits.
We also see through this novel how whisper networks can themselves be exclusionary and founded on inherent power dynamics. As Kelsey McKinney wrote in her book on gossip (featured in our last post), “Whisper networks… can be elitist and insular and are prone to exclude women of color. Because whisper networks are not codified and require someone with knowledge to seek you out in particular and share it with you, they replicate the same kinds of racist, classist, and gender biases that exist in every aspect of our society.”
One of the most important characters in Whisper Network is Rosalita, an immigrant who works as a night-time cleaner at Truviv. While Rosalita has experienced many of the same issues as the other women, Rosalita is more isolated and closed off from the whisper network that shields the other women and allows them to seek remedial action for their grievances: “‘The walls are thick,’ she said. She hadn’t heard. For all she knew, the jobs of the men and women who worked on these floors were to tap nonsense into their keyboards, yell into speakerphones, and shuffle papers. In substance, it was a black hole to Rosalita, as she assumed her world was to them.”
Rosalita works late at night with only one other coworker; she is a single mother; she is not a native English speaker; and her position as a cleaner means that many other employees underestimate her and belittle her. Moreover, the power imbalance between Rosalita and Ames is even larger than that between Ames and the women in his legal department, making Rosalita more vulnerable to his egregious tendencies: “She stood, feet hip-width apart, the full pail held at her waist. The power differential loomed massive.”
Finally, this fictional novel also provides an important hypothetical case-study for employers, as we see the immensely complicated and costly legal issues that result from decades of Ames’s unchecked behavior. Indeed, promptly investigating complaints of sexual harassment or gender discrimination and acting to prevent future harm helps employees enjoy a safer and more equitable workplace, and helps employers fend off costly and damaging lawsuits.
#MeToo’s Impact on Sexual Harassment Legislation in California
Whisper Network, published in 2020, was written shortly after the apex of the #MeToo movement, which gained prominent media attention in 2017. After allegations against Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein were first reported on in October 2017 (first by Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey in The New York Times, and then by Ronan Farrow in The New Yorker), a wave of additional women came forward both formally (through allegations, complaints and lawsuits), and informally, by sharing their experiences on social media with the hashtag “#metoo.”
During this time period, numerous public figures were implicated or exposed. According to one New York Times article, the #MeToo movement led to “the downfall” of 201 powerful men in the U.S., nearly half of whom were replaced in their positions by women. Some other notable cases that occurred during this time period included Bill Cosby’s conviction of sexual assault in April 2018, and Christine Blasey Ford’s September 2018 public testimony against then-U.S. Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh, accusing him of sexual assault. In January 2018, Larry Nassar was sentenced to 40 to 175 years in prison for seven counts of felony criminal sexual conduct, and is currently serving a life sentence for sexually abusing the women of the U.S. Olympics women’s gymnastics team over the course of decades.
In California around this time, we also saw a wave of allegations and whistle blower complaints, particularly in Silicon Valley’s tech industry, with famous, public accounts from Susan Fowler at Uber (in early 2017) and Ifeoma Ozoma at Pinterest (in June 2020), among others. Ozoma’s allegations focused on race discrimination, and she was particularly engaged in activism and legislative reform around sexual harassment and discrimination laws in California, spearheading the initiative for the eventual passing of California’s Silence No-More Act.
One of the most significant aspects of the #MeToo movement (both nationally and globally) was the attention it drew to the weaponization of non-disclosure agreements (“NDAs”) to silence victims of workplace harassment and abuse. NDAs are legally binding contracts between two parties, requiring one party to maintain the confidentiality of specific information. NDAs are often embedded in the original employment contract, requiring employees to maintain the confidentiality of trade secrets and other company information. However, NDAs can also be used to preemptively “settle” complaints of unlawful conduct, even before the employee engages in a formal posture of litigation. With Harvey Weinstein, for example, we saw how he weaponized NDAs to silence his victims for decades.
In most of the famous #MeToo stories (including the Weinstein and Nassar cases), the women who came forward with their accounts knowingly violated contractual agreements that they had signed earlier, forbidding them from speaking out about the abuses they had endured. In other words, many of these women risked significantly legal and financial liability by speaking out and shedding light on these abuses. In the case of Ozoma, she knowingly broke her non-disclosure agreement (“NDA”) to come forth with her allegations against her employer, further showcasing the prevalence of NDAs, and their impact on the reporting of potentially unlawful workplace conduct, not just in the context of sexual harassment, but also in relation to all potentially unlawful workplace conduct.
The Silence No-More Act first went into effect in California in January 2022, fundamentally restricting the use of confidentiality and non-disparagement agreements in the context of harassment, discrimination, and retaliation claims. Currently, non-disclosure agreements and non-disparagement clauses cannot restrict an employee or former employee’s ability to talk about potential unlawful workplace conduct, including: sexual assault; sexual harassment; sex-based discrimination; discrimination based on any protected characteristic under FEHA (race, religion, disability, etc.); and retaliation based on a protected activity. Although these agreements can still be used in formal settlement agreements, the Silence No-More Act establishes specific safeguards to prevent them from being abused and manipulated unjustly.
Conducting Sexual Harassment Investigations
As the #MeToo movement spread across the country and the globe, social, cultural and legal attitudes towards this type of secrecy changed. NDAs, that were once viewed as a public relations necessity for any public figure or employer, now became a potential liability in itself.
During this #MeToo wave in California, we also saw a significant increase in sexual harassment complaints being investigated, including historic complaints dating back from years or even decades earlier. Increasingly, the parties of the investigation (the complainant and the respondent) now receive greater detail about the outcome and conclusion of the investigation; and some employers even make executive summaries of their confidential investigative reports public to the media. Again, the culture around secrecy and confidentiality changed dramatically, with a greater emphasis on the public policy interest in revealing and disclosing some of these issues to the public.
There is now also significant legal precedent suggesting that it is unlawful to require an employee to maintain the confidentiality of issues relating to unlawful conduct in the workplace (including workplace investigations, that generally focus on issues of potentially unlawful conduct). As such, whenever we start an investigation interview, we always explain the confidentiality of the process, and ask the interviewee to not talk to their coworkers about what we talk about in the interview, while the investigation is ongoing. The purpose of this is to preserve the integrity of the investigation, so the future witness’ perspectives are not muddied by what they have already heard from others. Investigators do not, however, direct or require interviewees to participate in this confidentiality.
Conclusion
Our next post will be published on July 1, 2025, and will focus on Unbound by Tarana Burke and Awakening by Rachel Vogelstein and Meighan Stone, starting a larger series on the global #MeToo movement. From there, I will start to focus on the #MeToo movement in different countries from across the globe, starting with England.
The List by Yomi Adegoke and Jaded by Ela Lee, both by British authors, will allow us to continue our focus on themes of gossip and hearsay, while assessing the global #MeToo movement from an English perspective. With striking similarities to Whisper Network, The List is a fictional work about sexual harassment in the workplace, also involving a list of accused men, and other similar themes to those seen in Whisper Network. Jaded focuses on similar themes of sexual harassment in the workplace, sexual assault, and gender-based and race-based microaggressions; and, like Whisper Network, was also written by an attorney.
Share this article:
