Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2023-07-03 03:15:09 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING

The claim that the Supreme court relied on a fraudulent story in reaching their decision is untrue. The ruling and its reasoning make no mention of the hoax inquiry for service that has recently been publicized. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/600/21-476/

Written by 3BE6E3286B2D3965870F36A1512E8D229734B1217BE516BCE9B8E456142025EC
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/1675633595749404672

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 - 1675704704335241216
  • noteId - 1675704704335241216
  • participantId -
  • noteAuthorParticipantId - 3BE6E3286B2D3965870F36A1512E8D229734B1217BE516BCE9B8E456142025EC Participant Details
  • createdAtMillis - 1688354109258
  • tweetId - 1675633595749404672
  • classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
  • believable -
  • harmful -
  • validationDifficulty -
  • misleadingOther - 0
  • misleadingFactualError - 1
  • misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
  • misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
  • misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
  • misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
  • misleadingSatire - 0
  • notMisleadingOther - 0
  • notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
  • notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
  • notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
  • notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
  • trustworthySources - 1
  • summary
    • The claim that the Supreme court relied on a fraudulent story in reaching their decision is untrue. The ruling and its reasoning make no mention of the hoax inquiry for service that has recently been publicized. https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/600/21-476/

Note Status History

createdAt timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus firstNonNMRStatus timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus currentStatus timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus mostRecentNonNMRStatus participantId
2023-07-03 03:15:09 UTC
(1688354109258)
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
(-1)
2023-07-04 02:10:44 UTC
(1688436644963)
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC
(-1)

Note Ratings

rated at rated by
2023-07-03 16:05:03 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 15:38:28 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 14:52:31 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 13:24:48 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 11:51:06 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 10:03:27 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 09:44:42 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 09:38:28 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 09:09:50 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 08:53:27 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 08:40:03 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 08:36:23 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 08:05:02 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 07:55:39 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 07:40:48 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 06:14:54 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 05:32:59 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 04:35:16 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 04:32:25 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 04:18:30 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 04:15:08 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 03:53:02 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 01:32:14 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 01:20:05 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 00:56:25 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 23:42:44 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 23:15:57 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 22:57:51 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 22:41:41 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 22:30:51 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 22:25:11 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 22:24:17 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-02 22:21:14 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 23:51:58 -0500 Rating Details
2023-07-03 20:42:05 -0500 Rating Details