The magazine also said in its mail that while the organisation encourages free expression and constructive political debate, it has a zero tolerance policy towards hate speech.
Yeah, it was worded imprecisely enough to make misinterpretation possible, which is always a bad move when discussing contentious issues no matter your intention.
Definitely wasn’t bad enough that she deserved being immediately fired, cancelled and defamed as a terrorism sympathiser, though.
Yeah I’ll agree with that. It was exceptionally poor wording and it comes down to the benefit of the doubt if you believe she worded it poorly vs … yeah. But the deserves the benefit of the doubt.
It was still a bad post, at least based on how it reads to the average unknowing person.
Yeah, it was worded imprecisely enough to make misinterpretation possible, which is always a bad move when discussing contentious issues no matter your intention.
Definitely wasn’t bad enough that she deserved being immediately fired, cancelled and defamed as a terrorism sympathiser, though.
Yeah I’ll agree with that. It was exceptionally poor wording and it comes down to the benefit of the doubt if you believe she worded it poorly vs … yeah. But the deserves the benefit of the doubt.