In reply to:
Stephen McIntyre
@ClimateAudit
·
583d
Mark Reeder
@franklin_reeder
·
583d
The statement is part of a conversation about journalistic practices and the sharing of potentially classified information. It discusses the implications of surveillance and the dissemination of information involving U.S. lawmakers. The tone is informative and critical, and the intent seems to be to question the integrity of the reporting and the sources involved.
- The statement does not appear to do harm with words or actions, but rather shares information about a reported event. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy and dignity by not revealing personal information, but discusses the implications of surveillance on privacy. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement engages in a form of constructive criticism about journalistic practices and sources. [+1]Principle 4:I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
- The statement aims to use influence to highlight concerns about privacy and the use of classified information, which could be seen as bettering society by promoting transparency. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech by sharing information and engaging in public discourse responsibly. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.