Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-05-23 20:39:29 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 209EBFFE38776D809311E48256FA23BC0A0BE4D5069053ACAACECBB46A5B092D
Participant Details

Original Note:

The Court of Appeal found “the Defendant was responsible for the unlawful publication”. Before appealing, the Defendant must seek permission from the Court of Appeal to appeal to the U.K. Supreme Court or request permission from the higher court directly. https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/cadwalladr-to-pay-million-pound-damages/ https://inforrm.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/05/Banks-v-Cadwalladr-CA-order.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1661104449069236224
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 209EBFFE38776D809311E48256FA23BC0A0BE4D5069053ACAACECBB46A5B092D
  • createdAtMillis - 1684874369255
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • 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 - 1661104449069236224209EBFFE38776D809311E48256FA23BC0A0BE4D5069053ACAACECBB46A5B092D