Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-04-17 00:31:43 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 90FDA0B5A040B88FBC2A4E68F0EF17D54BF72C714FDADE953C4785A47FEDC997
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 - 90FDA0B5A040B88FBC2A4E68F0EF17D54BF72C714FDADE953C4785A47FEDC997
  • createdAtMillis - 1681691503038
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 164768045806139392290FDA0B5A040B88FBC2A4E68F0EF17D54BF72C714FDADE953C4785A47FEDC997