Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-04-17 08:26:07 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0A60FBFECC56196611E3F2EEAECEB8BD7E54EC593F76B43DB2E1CA21BADA3FCE
Participant Details

Original Note:

No note needed on this tweet- it is factually correct. & the article subheading states; "The misstatements... are part of a pattern that has raised questions about how the Supreme Court justice views his obligation to accurately report details about his finances to the public ".

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1647680458061393922
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0A60FBFECC56196611E3F2EEAECEB8BD7E54EC593F76B43DB2E1CA21BADA3FCE
  • createdAtMillis - 1681719967853
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16476804580613939220A60FBFECC56196611E3F2EEAECEB8BD7E54EC593F76B43DB2E1CA21BADA3FCE