Matt Taibbi

Rank 34 of 47
|
Score -42

The statement is part of a broader conversation questioning the efficacy of a vaccine, which is a public health issue and thus constitutes public discourse. The tone is skeptical and possibly dismissive, questioning the vaccine's ability to prevent infection or transmission.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not directly cause harm but could contribute to public skepticism about vaccines, which may indirectly cause harm by influencing public health behaviors. [-1]
  2. 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 engage in direct harassment or hate speech, but the conversation it is part of includes derogatory language ('retarded'), which violates the principle of respecting dignity. [-2]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement does not promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it questions the vaccine's efficacy without providing evidence or context. [-1]
  4. 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 criticism or dialogue, as it is part of a conversation that includes personal attacks ('retarded'). [-2]
  5. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement engages in public discourse about vaccines, a significant public issue, but does so in a manner that lacks responsibility and integrity by not providing evidence or context. [-1]