Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-05-23 21:01:07 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 5DC6C16C9180372C469076C47E63C02C211B0B5CD6B8C1A7448EF05A709F5163
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 - 5DC6C16C9180372C469076C47E63C02C211B0B5CD6B8C1A7448EF05A709F5163
  • createdAtMillis - 1684875667616
  • 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 - 0
  • 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 - 16611044490692362245DC6C16C9180372C469076C47E63C02C211B0B5CD6B8C1A7448EF05A709F5163