Reposted by Matt Taibbi
Steve McGuire
@sfmcguire79
·
455d
The statement critiques major media outlets, suggesting their recent support for free speech is insincere and temporary, especially as elections approach. It implies skepticism about the authenticity of their commitment to free speech, framing it as a strategic move rather than a genuine shift in policy.
- The statement does not directly harm others but could contribute to a broader skepticism towards media outlets, which might indirectly affect public trust.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy of individuals but critiques organizations, which is generally acceptable in public discourse.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. Instead, it fosters a critical view of media outlets.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It focuses on the actions and motivations of organizations.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 uses its platform to challenge the integrity of media outlets, which can be seen as an attempt to hold them accountable, aligning with the principle of using influence for societal betterment.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by expressing a critical opinion about media practices, contributing to public discourse on the issue.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.