Matt Taibbi

Rank 34 of 47
|
Score -42
9/19/2024, 9:47:46 PM
X
In reply to:
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
297d
As I’ve reported, GEC both during and after Trump’s presidency was Las very aggressive about leftist populist movements like the yellow vests.
Matt Taibbi
@mtaibbi
·
297d
GEC even during the Trump presidency was extremely aggressive about vaccine messaging, to the point where it tried to label as foreign propaganda any accounts that raised questions about American vaccines or promoted foreign versions.
GSchultz, Honest weights & equal measure
@guyschultz
·
297d
@mtaibbi @elonmusk Credibility is questionable. No India @elonmusk reporting? Nothing on Trump’s pressure to push the vaccine through? Nothing on the quieting of voices concerned with fetal tissue as Trump set up the vaccines?

The statement 'The purpose of these agencies is to suppress any criticism of state policy, whether from the left or the right.' constitutes public discourse as it engages with a substantive public issue regarding the role of government agencies in managing public opinion and criticism. The tone is critical and accusatory, suggesting that these agencies are intentionally suppressing dissent. The intent appears to be to highlight and criticize the actions of these agencies in a way that suggests a violation of democratic principles.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but implies that harm is being done by the agencies. It neither aligns with nor violates this principle significantly.
  2. 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 engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech. It respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the actions of agencies rather than individuals. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion. It is accusatory and does not seek to foster a constructive dialogue. [-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 does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue. It makes a broad accusation without providing specific evidence or engaging with opposing viewpoints. [-1]
  5. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses influence to bring attention to a perceived issue with government agencies, which could be seen as an attempt to better society by promoting transparency and accountability. [+1]
  6. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principle of free speech by expressing a critical opinion about government actions. However, it could be more responsible by providing evidence or context to support the claim. [+1]