When people gather in groups, they talk. They trade news and information, they share stories about themselves and others, they speculate, they comment. In short, people gossip.
Ma'at is an ethic of community; thus the forces that are intrinsic to social dynamics must be considered in terms of ma'at. Further, we are granted the power of heka, the ability to shape the universe with the words we use and create realities with them; we have the responsibility to use this gift wisely. Gossip, which lies at an intersection between community and speech, demands judgement and care.
It is too easy to say that gossip is bad or negative or otherwise should be abolished; too easy, and wrong. This is one of the means by which communities are built and maintained; that people are drawn to it is an upswelling of that fundamental social urge. It is also easy to dismiss "gossip" as only being the negative forms of this, the spreading of false reports and malicious commentary, reserving other words for sharing of information or discussion of people in the community. I would prefer not to take the easy way out.
If gossip can be done in ma'at, what does that mean?
Ma'at, translated 'truth': that which is said must be true. This is straightforward enough. I would say that it demands not only truth, but whole truths, not half-truths; it is very easy to do harm with partial truths, because they cannot be denied, only placed in context, and that takes effort, strength, and, frequently, quick thinking. Speaking in truth keeps our heka pure; it is not creating lies and unravelling the real.
Ma'at, that force which gathers people together into communities: thus, discussion of other people in such a way that the community bonds are reinforced and made stronger. Okay, easy enough, but again, what does this mean?
There are things that people in communities know about each other. The relationships they establish with each other; matters of health and generalised status; preferences, things of import, changes in employment, and so on. Not all of these are things that will be stated directly to each member of the community; this information will diffuse outward through the means of gossip, thereby making it possible for the community to support its members.
At the same time, there is a fine line to walk, ma'at as balance: not all information that one might have about a person is appropriate to share with others. Some people are more private than others (and this shapes community standards of disclosure and gossip); some information may cause them harm if it is generally known, or disclosed under circumstances in which they are not available for corrections and commentary upon it. (This should be familiar to anyone who has spent a lot of time considering closeting and 'coming out'.) Respecting privacy is a matter of courtesy.
But this leads to the question of ma'at as connective justice: some people will not want certain information about them shared because they know that if the truth of their behaviour or their nature is known, they will suffer the consequences of their actions. Their concealment is not privacy, but hiding from the rebalancing that comes of facing up to ma'at and looking Her in the face. Sheltering predators by not speaking of the harm they have done is allowing them to continue disrupting the community by their actions.
Speaking ill of someone, no matter how truthful that may be, will divide communities. This means that it must be done carefully and with great consideration -- but that consideration must be given not only to the person spoken of, but those who might be harmed if left in ignorance. Truth is a difficult place to be, and each person can only speak of what they know, which may not be the whole of things. An intent to divide community can not be ma'at; this should not, however, be confused with defending that community by pointing out those things which threaten it and, if necessary, removing them from the community.
Some gossip is only spoken behind closed doors, in secret places. At times, this is the gossip of smaller communities, defined in different terms. At others, however, it is talesharing with intent to exclude, to form a rift in the broader community, to create a narrative in which some people are not a part, or are only a part as the target of the story. Sometimes it is hard to discern which side of the line one is on.
I have seen a fairly simple rule of thumb for whether or not to say a thing: Is it true? Is it useful? Is it kind? While this is not a complete set of considerations, I consider it a good start. Gossip is the narrative of a community, its internal mythology, the stories the community tells about itself; I would not want the words that speak my community into being to be other than true, useful, and kind, where that is at all possible.
If we look at the negative confessions, we find, among others (these are from the papyrus of Ani):
And (from the papyrus of Nu):
These are among the confessions made before the tribunal that judges the dead, and thus a reasonable guide for how the ancients considered behaviour in ma'at. We see here that speaking is to be done in truthfulness, not to inflict harm or discord, and not pruriently. In other confessions, we see "I have not depressed the pointer of the balance"; I would suggest that this confession, taken metaphorically, stands against spinning the truth to one's unreasonable benefit.
Comparative religion assignment: consider the Jewish concepts of lashon hara and rechilut.