In reply to:
Gordon Johnson
@GordonJohnson19
·
565d
The statement is part of a public discourse, engaging with the content and quality of journalism in an interview with a public figure. The tone is inquisitive and somewhat critical, with the intent to seek confirmation about the depth of the interview and to express expectations for the type of questions that should be asked in such a setting.
- The statement does not cause harm but rather seeks to ensure that important issues are addressed, aligning with the principle of doing no harm with words and actions. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by not engaging in personal attacks but rather focusing on the professional conduct of the interview. [+1]Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The user is promoting understanding by asking for clarification on whether critical topics were discussed, which aligns with the principle of using words to promote understanding and empathy. [+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 is a form of constructive criticism, as it questions the thoroughness of the interview without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- There is no mistake to acknowledge or correct in this context.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The user is using their platform to engage in a discussion about the quality of journalism, which aligns with the principle of using influence for the betterment of society and upholding the principles of free speech responsibly. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.