Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2023-07-01 02:09:50 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING

This is a decision about compelled speech treating artistic/written endeavors like a website in this case as a First Amendment issue. As such it is on strong ground, but the real problem is the case should never have been heard as it was a hypothetical, no actual customer. https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-3/21-the-requirement-of-a-real-interest.html

Written by E7902695B11F5CA56CE496D07835B19E510A27BA868639C9251E41EF3567BB7D
Participant Details

All Information

• ID - 1674963491256430593
• noteId - 1674963491256430593
• participantId -
• noteAuthorParticipantId - E7902695B11F5CA56CE496D07835B19E510A27BA868639C9251E41EF3567BB7D Participant Details
• createdAtMillis - 1688177390291
• tweetId - 1674782002040676359
• classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
• believable -
• harmful -
• validationDifficulty -
• misleadingOther - 0
• misleadingFactualError - 0
• misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
• misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
• misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
• misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
• misleadingSatire - 0
• notMisleadingOther - 0
• notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
• notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
• notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
• notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
• trustworthySources - 1
• summary
• This is a decision about compelled speech treating artistic/written endeavors like a website in this case as a First Amendment issue. As such it is on strong ground, but the real problem is the case should never have been heard as it was a hypothetical, no actual customer. https://law.justia.com/constitution/us/article-3/21-the-requirement-of-a-real-interest.html