Jill Stien

Rank 38 of 47
|
Score -97

The statement in question accuses Zionists of attacking UCLA students and criticizes the police for their alleged inaction, framing it as state-sanctioned violence. This statement is a part of public discourse as it addresses issues of public safety, law enforcement behavior, and the right to peaceful assembly.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement may potentially cause harm by spreading unverified information and by using charged language that could escalate tensions. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the dignity of the students but potentially compromises the dignity of the groups labeled as 'violent Zionists' and the police, by making broad and unverified accusations. [-1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks a tone of empathy and understanding, particularly towards those being accused. It does not promote a balanced view or consider multiple perspectives. [-1]
  4. 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 dialogue but does so in a way that could be seen as divisive rather than constructive, due to its accusatory tone. [-1]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    There is no indication of an effort to correct or verify the information, which could lead to misinformation. [-1]
  6. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The use of charged language may not be seen as using influence for the betterment of society, as it could contribute to division rather than resolution. [-1]
  7. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement does exercise free speech but may not be using this right responsibly if the allegations are unfounded or exaggerated. [-1]