The statement in question criticizes the mainstream media for allegedly ignoring significant events such as mass graves in favor of covering less critical issues like college campus protests. It implies a bias or a failure in media responsibility to adequately report on all matters of significant public concern, particularly those involving human rights violations.
Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.The statement attempts to highlight a perceived negligence by the media, which could be seen as an effort to prevent harm by advocating for more comprehensive coverage of serious issues.
[+1]Principle 2:
I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.While the statement respects the dignity of the victims by calling attention to their plight, it may inadvertently disrespect individuals involved in campus protests by diminishing the importance of their concerns.
[-1]Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.The statement promotes understanding by pointing out what the speaker sees as a discrepancy in media coverage, but it lacks a compassionate approach towards all parties involved.
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 engages in a form of criticism of the media; however, it could foster more constructive dialogue by suggesting ways the media could improve its coverage rather than just pointing out its failures.
Principle 6:
I will use my influence for the betterment of society.The statement uses its influence to highlight serious issues, which is beneficial for society. However, the tone could be adjusted to encourage a more balanced view of media responsibilities.
[+1]Principle 7:
I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.The statement challenges the media to uphold the principles of free speech and responsible reporting, but it does so in a somewhat confrontational manner that might not encourage positive change.