Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-03-07 01:19:25 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 12CFC2D9FB72077E67AE0A7B8856BF85E0E5F69A32D1D851B7F485C425EE3C0E
Participant Details

Original Note:

The statement is not defamatory because the only factual statement in the quoted articles is true - that Mr. Knowles said what he said. How to interpret what he said is an opinion based on a disclosed fact, and thus not actionable. https://www.rcfp.org/two-courts-reaffirm-protections-opinions-based-disclosed-facts/ https://www.virginiadefamationlawyer.com/implied-undisclosed-facts-as-basis-for-defamation-claim/ https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-alnd-1_07-cv-01255/pdf/USCOURTS-alnd-1_07-cv-01255-0.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1632553935532638210
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 12CFC2D9FB72077E67AE0A7B8856BF85E0E5F69A32D1D851B7F485C425EE3C0E
  • createdAtMillis - 1678151965708
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 163255393553263821012CFC2D9FB72077E67AE0A7B8856BF85E0E5F69A32D1D851B7F485C425EE3C0E