Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-01-22 22:27:51 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: FABEE342DECC60C484C0982BB951F24D6B5B9CDF602DEF92213B3D906C4A0D68
Participant Details

Original Note:

The Op-Ed was ruled defamatory. It was ruled that Heard defamed Depp with actual malice and intent to cause harm. The judgment is entered into record & stands as the appeals have been withdrawn, due to a confidential agreement between both parties. https://news.sky.com/story/amber-heard-files-appeal-against-johnny-depp-libel-trial-verdict-12762074

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1617287252278657026
  • participantId - FABEE342DECC60C484C0982BB951F24D6B5B9CDF602DEF92213B3D906C4A0D68
  • raterParticipantId -
  • createdAtMillis - 1674426471493
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 1617287252278657026FABEE342DECC60C484C0982BB951F24D6B5B9CDF602DEF92213B3D906C4A0D68