Reposted by Matt Taibbi
Jay Bhattacharya
@DrJBhattacharya
·
581d
The statement constitutes public discourse as it engages with a public issue, specifically the topic of government influence over social media and free speech. The tone is critical and somewhat dystopian, suggesting a loss of individual autonomy and freedom of thought due to government actions.
- The statement does not directly cause harm but uses a metaphor that could be seen as alarmist. It does not explicitly violate this principle but could be more measured in its language.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It respects the privacy and dignity of others. [+1]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. It is more focused on criticism and warning. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. It critiques a policy and its implications rather than individuals. [+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 upholds the principle of free speech and uses the platform to raise awareness about a perceived threat to this freedom. It is responsible in its critique but could be more balanced. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.