Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-04-16 19:26:10 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 5ED87C189050C4D66808D65DFA0BBE91391387B2AC9A5B88981ADA3806E6D3DF
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 - 5ED87C189050C4D66808D65DFA0BBE91391387B2AC9A5B88981ADA3806E6D3DF
  • createdAtMillis - 1681673170784
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 16476804580613939225ED87C189050C4D66808D65DFA0BBE91391387B2AC9A5B88981ADA3806E6D3DF