Reposted by Michael Shellenberger
The statement critiques Gavin Newsom's campaign ad by alleging a discrepancy between his claims and actions regarding forest fire prevention funding. It engages in public discourse by addressing a public figure's policy decisions and their implications.
- The statement aims to hold a public figure accountable, which can be seen as striving to do no harm by promoting transparency. [+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, as it focuses on policy critique rather than personal attacks. [+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, as it is primarily critical.Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in criticism but does not provide a platform for dialogue or constructive engagement with differing 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 does not acknowledge or correct any mistakes, as it is a critique of another's actions.Principle 5:I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
- The statement uses its platform to potentially influence public opinion by highlighting alleged discrepancies in policy and action. [+1]Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by critiquing a public figure's actions, but it should ensure accuracy and fairness in its claims. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.