Reposted by Jake Tapper
The statement and the linked conversation constitute public discourse as they engage with a public issue concerning the conduct of a public figure, Eric Adams, and his acceptance of foreign travel and perks. The tone is critical and aims to highlight a potential ethical concern regarding Adams' actions.
- The statement does not appear to cause harm directly but raises a legitimate concern about a public figure's actions, which is a valid part of public discourse. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on a public figure's actions rather than engaging in personal attacks or hate speech. [+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 explicitly promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, but it does raise awareness about a potential ethical issue, which can be seen as contributing to informed public discourse.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive criticism by pointing out a specific issue related to a public figure's conduct. It does not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments. [+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.
- By raising a concern about a public figure's actions, the statement uses influence to potentially better society by encouraging transparency and accountability. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds the principles of free speech and uses the platform responsibly by addressing a public issue with integrity. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.