Marquis Malik
@NiteNiteCurry
·
28d
The statement and the accompanying tweet engage in public discourse by addressing issues of free speech, government influence on social media, and vaccine efficacy. The tone is critical and challenges government actions and public health policies.
- The statement questions the efficacy of vaccines and government actions, which could potentially spread misinformation, thus not fully adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement implies government pressure on social media, which could be seen as a violation of privacy and dignity, but it does not engage in direct harassment or hate speech.Principle 2:I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
- The statement engages in criticism of government actions but lacks constructive dialogue or evidence-based arguments, leaning towards personal attacks on policy decisions. [-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 uses its platform to challenge government actions, which can be seen as an attempt to influence public opinion, but it may not necessarily be for the betterment of society if it spreads misinformation. [-1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by criticizing government censorship but may not use the platform responsibly if it spreads misinformation.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.