Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-05-03 07:23:07 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1E39864F56AE9F998B9C0096846F22A21FEA457C84FCD7E9309E7E2AD5E87B8B
Participant Details

Original Note:

The article supporting the tweet does not support the proposition of an “official blacklist”, as it does not provide any evidence of sanctions or actions taken against the journalists listed. The précis of the journalist positions on the list seem to be accurate at face value.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1653377258353197058
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1E39864F56AE9F998B9C0096846F22A21FEA457C84FCD7E9309E7E2AD5E87B8B
  • createdAtMillis - 1683098587058
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • 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 - 16533772583531970581E39864F56AE9F998B9C0096846F22A21FEA457C84FCD7E9309E7E2AD5E87B8B