Birdwatch Note
2023-08-30 12:52:43 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING
Note is misleading The Cochrane review it doesn't link to is misrepresented in purpose & quality, per EIC: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/masks-effective-study-respected-group-misinterpreted/story?id=97846561 Review itself claims low quality ("high risk of bias", "low adherence"), even says "N95 … compared with … surgical masks may be effective": https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full Studies support article: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7106e1.htm
Written by 9CB8A0359B83A831EDE9A38FFE0E3E5ED73D1677A50374D2E1619F1450E2E77A
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/1695858443498783173
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 - 1696868550625878486
- noteId - 1696868550625878486
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 9CB8A0359B83A831EDE9A38FFE0E3E5ED73D1677A50374D2E1619F1450E2E77A Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1693399963417
- tweetId - 1695858443498783173
- classification - NOT_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 0
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 1
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 1
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 1
- summary
- Note is misleading The Cochrane review it doesn't link to is misrepresented in purpose & quality, per EIC: https://abcnews.go.com/Health/masks-effective-study-respected-group-misinterpreted/story?id=97846561 Review itself claims low quality ("high risk of bias", "low adherence"), even says "N95 … compared with … surgical masks may be effective": https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD006207.pub6/full Studies support article: https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/71/wr/mm7106e1.htm
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2023-08-30 12:52:43 UTC (1693399963417) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
2023-08-31 02:11:33 UTC (1693447893349) |
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2023-08-30 08:16:33 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-08-30 08:00:43 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-09-04 07:53:28 -0500 | Rating Details |