Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2022-06-28 06:37:38 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0970AF2EDBB2160765D64BA2ADD89F73D654E9F9EC01C4671E82A8F98561183F
Participant Details

Original Note:

The Supreme Court decision does not mean police are not required to inform someone of their rights before being interrogated. It only means they cannot be sued for failing to do so. Testimony given to police without being informed is presumably still not admissible in court. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/us-supreme-court-protects-police-miranda-lawsuits-2022-06-23/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1541465459987316737
participantId - 0970AF2EDBB2160765D64BA2ADD89F73D654E9F9EC01C4671E82A8F98561183F
raterParticipantId -
createdAtMillis - 1656398258826
version - 2
agree - 0
disagree - 0
helpful - 0
notHelpful - 0
helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
helpfulOther - 0
helpfulInformative - 0
helpfulClear - 0
helpfulEmpathetic - 0
helpfulGoodSources - 1
helpfulUniqueContext - 0
helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
helpfulImportantContext - 1
helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
notHelpfulOther - 0
notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
notHelpfulOutdated - 0
notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 15414654599873167370970AF2EDBB2160765D64BA2ADD89F73D654E9F9EC01C4671E82A8F98561183F