You can prefer whatever world you want, it's not the one you live in.

The person starting shit is the one causing a confrontation. Extension of confidence is not problematic - "jack only got this job because his aunt is on the board of directors" is a statement you make when you're telling someone one or more of the following:

- Jack is incompetent.

- I don't like jack.

- I work harder than jack.

- I think you work harder than Jack.

- You and I are not like Jack.

- We both work harder than Jack.

- We're both more competent than Jack.

- We're both more virtuous than Jack.

- etc.

Take that back to Jack? That's a betrayal of trust. I know you don't want to hear this because it's what you did. It's what got you your "reputation." And it's way easier to think that you did the virtuous thing, rather than fucking up, but you fucked up. And that's why you have a reputation.

Your relationship with PC does not trump your relationship with MT. They coexist. The move was to tell PC that you're friends with MT and that you don't think MT would like PC spreading her information around. Your confrontation was with PC, not with MT. You needed to keep confidence there and you didn't. You can absolutely express your displeasure to PC and encourage her to behave; it then becomes a thing between PC and you where you're defending MT's interests. You're giving PC an opportunity to reexamine her relationship with MT, as well as with the rest of the office. You're also throwing a flag on the play so that similar breaches are less likely to happen.

Instead you overruled the wishes of PC and made things awkward for her. You took the initiative everyone else didn't to go to MT and say "I'm a better friend to you than PC is." You did not resolve a small situation in an environment of trust, you turned a small situation into a large one in a situation of discord and everybody remembers it now.

Thing is, you didn't stop the gossip. You stopped the gossip from coming to you. You betrayed trust. And by telling MT, you forced MT to address the issue when maybe she would have preferred to let it blow over.

What I’m getting from your argument is it’s 100% to say whatever you want about people so long as no one turns around and let’s those people know what’s being said.

That's because you want to be in the right and the only way you can stay there is if I'm an evil shithead.

I'm not an evil shithead.

What I'm saying is that you have control over what you say to other people. You have no control over what other people say to you, and you have no control over what other people say to other people. Your integrity and your reputation hinges entirely on what you say to other people and blowing shit up gives you a reputation as a bomb-thrower, not a peacemaker. And I mean, to get there and feel good about it you've had to adopt "trust no one" as a motto:

Jack shouldn’t assume he can trust his audience when he goes and speaks to Jane; he’s already proven himself an untrustworthy audience by repeating what he’s heard from Jill in some degree of confidence.

To hold this belief you have to assume that everyone is either honest or dishonest and there's no in between. Life doesn't work that way. You know it and the harder you try to make it so, the fewer members your ingroup will have.