Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-05-26 10:00:23 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: C818901FAF1FB802E7B588D62CFF8FE90A9E0939B7C7638F28628C815A2E800F
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 - C818901FAF1FB802E7B588D62CFF8FE90A9E0939B7C7638F28628C815A2E800F
  • createdAtMillis - 1685095223905
  • 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 - 1
  • 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 - 1661104449069236224C818901FAF1FB802E7B588D62CFF8FE90A9E0939B7C7638F28628C815A2E800F