Michael Schellenberger

Rank 43 of 47
|
Score -120
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
94d
We must censor the Internet to counter the spread of misinformation, say global leaders. But only free speech, not censorship, can counter misinformation. The real reason they want mass online censorship is so they won't keep getting called out for spreading disinformation.
1/9/2025, 2:34:27 PM
X
In reply to:
Michael Shellenberger
@shellenberger
·
61d
The EU government will have 150 thought police listening to @elonmusk livestream with @Alice_Weidel today in order to lay the groundwork for fining and censoring X.

The statement is a critical response to perceived EU actions regarding online content moderation, using strong language to express disagreement. It suggests that EU leaders are overstepping in their scrutiny of online discourse.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement uses aggressive language, which could be seen as harmful or inflammatory, potentially violating the principle of doing no harm. [-1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The use of the term 'attack dogs' could be considered disrespectful, potentially violating the principle of respecting the dignity of others. [-1]
  3. 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 dialogue and instead uses personal attacks, violating the principle of constructive criticism. [-2]
  4. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement attempts to influence public opinion against perceived censorship, aligning with the principle of using influence for societal betterment, though the approach is contentious. [+1]