The statement is part of a public discourse on the importance of accuracy in journalism, particularly concerning the legal distinctions in criminal convictions. The conversation highlights the tension between public perception and legal terminology, emphasizing the need for precise language in media reporting.
- The statement strives to do no harm by advocating for accuracy, which is crucial in maintaining public trust in journalism. [+1]Principle 1:I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
- The statement promotes understanding by clarifying the legal distinctions, which can foster a more informed public discussion. [+1]Principle 3:I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
- The statement engages in constructive dialogue by focusing on the importance of accuracy rather than attacking individuals. [+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 upholds free speech principles by responsibly using the platform to discuss journalistic integrity. [+1]Principle 7:I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.