Reposted by Jake Tapper 🦅
The statement by @Variety addresses a public issue, specifically the reactions to the Israel-Hamas conflict, and critiques the lack of condemnation for Hamas. It engages in public discourse by discussing societal reactions to a significant geopolitical event.
- The statement does not directly harm with words, but it could be seen as polarizing by implying a lack of condemnation for Hamas is equivalent to supporting a massacre. [-1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement does not engage in cyberbullying or hate speech, but it could be interpreted as dismissive of differing perspectives.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 or empathy, as it takes a strong stance without acknowledging the complexity of the issue. [-1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement does not engage in constructive dialogue, as it makes a broad generalization about people's reactions without inviting discussion. [-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 free speech to express a viewpoint on a public issue, but it could be more responsible by fostering dialogue rather than division.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.