Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-04-17 13:35:54 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: FEEFF4F980A2961BD583C8E0C18B742E2318F952ED965E6F46D252FBA0FF9659
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 - FEEFF4F980A2961BD583C8E0C18B742E2318F952ED965E6F46D252FBA0FF9659
  • createdAtMillis - 1681738554904
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • 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 - 1647680458061393922FEEFF4F980A2961BD583C8E0C18B742E2318F952ED965E6F46D252FBA0FF9659