Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2023-08-25 22:27:51 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING

Fox appealed on 4 grounds, including that the original judge erred in not defining the word "racist". The appeal found that the OJ had *not* erred in not defining the word racist. No definition of the word "racist" has come out of either the original judgement or this appeal. https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/1000

Written by 3904E25426A24F7509B2D1BF42CB4D2FFD80799A3B75916DECE5DA00DEFE8C8D
Participant Details

All Information

• ID - 1695201347035857403
• noteId - 1695201347035857403
• participantId -
• noteAuthorParticipantId - 3904E25426A24F7509B2D1BF42CB4D2FFD80799A3B75916DECE5DA00DEFE8C8D Participant Details
• createdAtMillis - 1693002471108
• tweetId - 1695007005537112446
• classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
• believable -
• harmful -
• validationDifficulty -
• misleadingOther - 0
• misleadingFactualError - 1
• misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
• misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
• misleadingMissingImportantContext - 1
• misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
• misleadingSatire - 0
• notMisleadingOther - 0
• notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
• notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
• notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
• notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
• trustworthySources - 1
• summary
• Fox appealed on 4 grounds, including that the original judge erred in not defining the word "racist". The appeal found that the OJ had *not* erred in not defining the word racist. No definition of the word "racist" has come out of either the original judgement or this appeal. https://caselaw.nationalarchives.gov.uk/ewca/civ/2023/1000