Reposted by Bret Baier
The statement critiques the response of Harris and the media to comments made by political figures, suggesting a disparity in reactions. It implies a bias or inconsistency in addressing public statements, which is a substantive engagement with public discourse.
- The statement does not directly harm with words but implies criticism of public figures and media, which is part of public discourse.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, but it does critique public figures and media, which is 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, as it focuses on criticism rather than constructive dialogue. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not provide constructive dialogue or solutions, and it could be seen as a personal attack on Harris and the media. [-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 highlight perceived inconsistencies in political and media responses, which can contribute to societal awareness. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by engaging in critique, but it could be more responsible by fostering constructive dialogue.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.