Birdwatch Note
2024-07-19 19:19:31 UTC - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
NNN post is simply stating what JKR said, so no CN needed. Proposed note really should just be in the comments. Furthermore, the Daily Mail is not considered a reliable source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail#:~:text=The%20Daily%20Mail%20has%20been,of%20plagiarism%20and%20copyright%20infringement.
Written by 9C62F20ECD15D3DDF2A177573C59498C0C0028FA0FD1936B92C1CEBF9CA5E413
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/1814307840082727265
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 - 1814379562895036854
- noteId - 1814379562895036854
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 9C62F20ECD15D3DDF2A177573C59498C0C0028FA0FD1936B92C1CEBF9CA5E413 Participant Details
- createdAtMillis - 1721416771995
- tweetId - 1814307840082727265
- classification - MISINFORMED_OR_POTENTIALLY_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 1
- misleadingFactualError - 1
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 1
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 1
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 0
- trustworthySources - 0
- summary
- NNN post is simply stating what JKR said, so no CN needed. Proposed note really should just be in the comments. Furthermore, the Daily Mail is not considered a reliable source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daily_Mail#:~:text=The%20Daily%20Mail%20has%20been,of%20plagiarism%20and%20copyright%20infringement.