Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note

2024-07-16 08:54:58 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING

NNN. The cass review is highly controversial and has been criticised by numerous publications and academic sources. Additionally, looking through the notes history of the writer of the proposed note shows a highly biased stance on the issue. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/integrity-project_cass-response.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwicoKL1l6uHAxVST0EAHW4cATEQFnoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3LDE1pINsQ1000Dbegv9uT

Written by 29F6E793EC7D173001CF4790F22F85198A9BD8FECA2F08D6036AC31DDAD7F3B5
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/1812462313313538483

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 - 1813135226060644565
  • noteId - 1813135226060644565
  • participantId -
  • noteAuthorParticipantId - 29F6E793EC7D173001CF4790F22F85198A9BD8FECA2F08D6036AC31DDAD7F3B5 Participant Details
  • createdAtMillis - 1721120098975
  • tweetId - 1812462313313538483
  • classification - NOT_MISLEADING
  • believable -
  • harmful -
  • validationDifficulty -
  • misleadingOther - 0
  • misleadingFactualError - 0
  • misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
  • misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
  • misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
  • misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
  • misleadingSatire - 0
  • notMisleadingOther - 0
  • notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 1
  • notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
  • notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
  • notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 1
  • trustworthySources - 1
  • summary
    • NNN. The cass review is highly controversial and has been criticised by numerous publications and academic sources. Additionally, looking through the notes history of the writer of the proposed note shows a highly biased stance on the issue. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://law.yale.edu/sites/default/files/documents/integrity-project_cass-response.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwicoKL1l6uHAxVST0EAHW4cATEQFnoECBIQAQ&usg=AOvVaw3LDE1pINsQ1000Dbegv9uT