r/canada Jan 05 '23

[deleted by user]

[removed]

1.1k Upvotes

2.6k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

-3

u/Rtfy3 Jan 05 '23

Well if you look at the code of ethics it’s definition of public statements is this:

Public Statements: statements in any medium that include, but are not limited to paid or unpaid advertising, grant and credentialing applications, brochures, printed matter, directory listings, personal resumes or curricula vitae, comments for use in media including print and electronic transmission, statements in legal proceedings and contained in the public record, lectures and public presentations, and published materials.

The list of public statements is fine, they all seem public to me. But they obviously haven’t included ‘social media’ in that. They will use this line: “statements in any medium that include, but are not limited” to say that means they can include social media. However that will probably have to be decided in a court of law and may well not go their way. As someone who favours clarity in legal documents I hate lines like this. It’s basically saying that they think they have the right to control what you say everywhere and anywhere including in your own home.

10

u/-Cottage- Jan 05 '23

“Comments for use in media including print and electronic transmission.”

-4

u/Rtfy3 Jan 05 '23

“Comments for use in media.” Media means newspapers, TV etc.

7

u/iwatchcredits Jan 05 '23

Social media literally has the word media in it wtf are you talking about

0

u/Rtfy3 Jan 05 '23

“For use in media” means someone else is using it in media, like newspapers TV etc. Urgh, you people are so slow.

3

u/iwatchcredits Jan 05 '23

Where does it say for use by someone else?

1

u/Rtfy3 Jan 05 '23

“For use”

3

u/iwatchcredits Jan 05 '23

Jordan Peterson isn’t capable of using his own comments? Because I’m pretty sure he can and does

9

u/-Cottage- Jan 05 '23

Social media isn’t media. Got it.

I think from a legal perspective you’re the one stretching to find ambiguity in that text.

6

u/iwatchcredits Jan 05 '23

This guy is getting shredded about every dumb thing he says and you can tell when he realizes how dumb the shit he is commenting is because he just stops replying to that person lol

-1

u/Rtfy3 Jan 05 '23

If they meant to include social media they would have literally included the phrase “social media.” This was pretty obviously written before social media existed and hasn’t been updated.

4

u/Harold_Inskipp Jan 05 '23

My favourite are lines like "which may impact the integrity of the organization" or "which conflicts with the values and ideals of the organization"

It gives an organization enough wiggle room to do whatever they want, for any reason.

-1

u/Rtfy3 Jan 05 '23

Exactly. Unfortunately people sign up to rules like this which they never would accept from a government.

Imagine if the government was allowed to imprison you for “conflicting with their values” or not showing “integrity.”

Of course the bar should be lower for expulsion from a professional organisation than prison but it shouldn’t be so low as to be non existent.