Birdwatch Note
2023-05-28 10:54:33 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
The tweet is incorrect to say that 5 justices “gutted” the EPA’s ability to set clean water standards. Although the justices differed on the exact approach (as often occurs), the Court’s actual decision in the case was unanimous: 9-0. All 9 justices agreed on the outcome. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf
Written by 7D4DB0326601FD8ABC7D4403BCBF4BE9E05A20D8A8DED59FFBC8C7E643174782
Participant Details
Original Tweet
Tweet embedding is no longer reliably available, due to the platform's instability (in terms of both technology and policy). If the Tweet still exists, you can view it here: https://twitter.com/foo_bar/status/1662189961502703622
Please note, though, that you may need to have your own Twitter account to access that page. I am currently exploring options for archiving Tweet data in a post-API context.
All Information
- ID - 1662774352184586246
- noteId - 1662774352184586246
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 7D4DB0326601FD8ABC7D4403BCBF4BE9E05A20D8A8DED59FFBC8C7E643174782 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1685271273071
- tweetId - 1662189961502703622
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 1
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- The tweet is incorrect to say that 5 justices “gutted” the EPA’s ability to set clean water standards. Although the justices differed on the exact approach (as often occurs), the Court’s actual decision in the case was unanimous: 9-0. All 9 justices agreed on the outcome. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdf
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2023-05-28 10:54:33 UTC (1685271273071) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
2023-05-31 02:39:52 UTC (1685500792003) |
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2023-05-30 05:18:58 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 21:28:44 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:30:07 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:27:16 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:18:46 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:12:57 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:12:07 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:04:34 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 13:00:23 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 12:22:18 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 12:19:23 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 11:28:19 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 11:16:01 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 10:04:00 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 09:20:37 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 08:23:13 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 07:58:32 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 06:46:51 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 06:36:44 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 06:20:21 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 06:14:38 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 06:00:05 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-05-28 05:55:15 -0500 | Rating Details |