The statement critiques government transparency and suggests that a lack of it fuels misinformation. It implies that people are increasingly skeptical of government narratives and highlights drones as an example. The tone is critical and suggests a call to action for greater transparency.
- The statement does not directly harm others but uses strong language that could be seen as inflammatory. [-1]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 the use of strong language could be seen as disrespectful. [-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 accusatory and critical. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive criticism or dialogue; it is more of a one-sided critique without engaging with opposing views. [-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 influence to highlight a societal issue, which could be seen as an attempt to better society by calling for transparency. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement exercises free speech but could be more responsible in its tone to avoid fueling further misinformation.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.