Birdwatch Note
2024-08-07 11:49:19 UTC - NOT_MISLEADING
NNN The post expresses an opinion. It’s an interpretation of the fact that Walz was chosen. Speculative, yes, but not dishonest. Disagreements are best expressed in the comments.
Written by 5AF3E89D7FE29CD18735E0574080BDF75D08636F3B69A6EEDC68767CC9753BCB
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/1820805335289843775
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 - 1821151635273289787
- noteId - 1821151635273289787
- participantId -
- noteAuthorParticipantId - 5AF3E89D7FE29CD18735E0574080BDF75D08636F3B69A6EEDC68767CC9753BCB
- createdAtMillis - 1723031359867
- tweetId - 1820805335289843775
- classification - NOT_MISLEADING
- believable -
- harmful -
- validationDifficulty -
- misleadingOther - 0
- misleadingFactualError - 0
- misleadingManipulatedMedia - 0
- misleadingOutdatedInformation - 0
- misleadingMissingImportantContext - 0
- misleadingUnverifiedClaimAsFact - 0
- misleadingSatire - 0
- notMisleadingOther - 0
- notMisleadingFactuallyCorrect - 0
- notMisleadingOutdatedButNotWhenWritten - 0
- notMisleadingClearlySatire - 0
- notMisleadingPersonalOpinion - 1
- trustworthySources - 0
- summary
- NNN The post expresses an opinion. It’s an interpretation of the fact that Walz was chosen. Speculative, yes, but not dishonest. Disagreements are best expressed in the comments.
Note Ratings
| rated at | rated by | |
| 2024-08-07 09:03:39 -0500 | Rating Details | |
| 2024-08-07 08:19:47 -0500 | Rating Details |