Birdwatch Note
2023-11-23 14:58:22 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
A decisão do juiz Paulo Baccarat considerou que Altman usou a expressão "ratos" para se referir aos judeus como um dog whistle. Além disso, considerou que o uso da expressão "racista" em algumas postagens era ofensivo, podendo configurar injúria ou calúnia. Link da decisão: https://esaj.tjsp.jus.br/cpopg/show.do?processo.codigo=2S001S5IU0000&processo.foro=100&processo.numero=1164015-57.2023.8.26.0100
Written by 9A78A3CA1D80575E3E4E15CB7A875580621AFD4011CC0044CC771FC081708D62
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/1727518871869960303
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 - 1727703141892649453
- noteId - 1727703141892649453
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 9A78A3CA1D80575E3E4E15CB7A875580621AFD4011CC0044CC771FC081708D62 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1700751502856
- tweetId - 1727518871869960303
- 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
- A decisão do juiz Paulo Baccarat considerou que Altman usou a expressão "ratos" para se referir aos judeus como um dog whistle. Além disso, considerou que o uso da expressão "racista" em algumas postagens era ofensivo, podendo configurar injúria ou calúnia. Link da decisão: https://esaj.tjsp.jus.br/cpopg/show.do?processo.codigo=2S001S5IU0000&processo.foro=100&processo.numero=1164015-57.2023.8.26.0100
Note Status History
| createdAt | timestampMillisOfFirstNonNMRStatus | firstNonNMRStatus | timestampMillisOfCurrentStatus | currentStatus | timestampMillisOfLatestNonNMRStatus | mostRecentNonNMRStatus | participantId |
| 2023-11-23 14:58:22 UTC (1700751502856) |
1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
2023-11-24 03:22:15 UTC (1700796135410) |
NEEDS_MORE_RATINGS | 1969-12-31 23:59:59 UTC (-1) |
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2023-11-23 12:54:09 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-11-23 12:32:51 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-11-23 12:27:04 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-11-23 11:40:13 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-11-23 09:17:24 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-11-23 08:58:52 -0600 | Rating Details | |
| 2023-11-23 13:28:29 -0600 | Rating Details |