The statement and linked content engage with a public issue, specifically addressing antisemitism on college campuses and the response of a university chancellor during a House hearing. This constitutes public discourse as it involves a substantive engagement with societal issues and public concerns.
- The statement does not directly cause harm, but the context of the linked content could potentially harm reputations if not handled sensitively.Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement respects privacy by not naming the faculty member involved, but the linked content could potentially lead to harassment if it identifies individuals. [-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 actively promote understanding, empathy, or compassion, as it seems to focus on a moment of failure rather than fostering dialogue. [-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, as it highlights a moment of freezing rather than discussing the issue of antisemitism constructively. [-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 its platform to highlight an issue of public concern, but it does not actively contribute to the betterment of society by offering solutions or fostering dialogue.Principle 6:I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
- The statement upholds free speech by discussing a public issue, but it could use its platform more responsibly by encouraging constructive dialogue.Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.