Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-04 08:44:50 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: E885231222A8461BF54B522BCBC64818C83B0A29C3301BC9F31ABEEDCE2BE445
Participant Details

Original Note:

Tweet expresses an opinion on factually correct claims. The case was based on whether or not a business owner, based on her personal beliefs, could refuse to provide services “celebrating marriages she does not endorse.” SCOTUS ruled she could. Note not needed. https://www.cpr.org/2023/06/30/supreme-court-303-creative-case-lgbtq/ https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-476_c185.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1675176417141874688
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - E885231222A8461BF54B522BCBC64818C83B0A29C3301BC9F31ABEEDCE2BE445
  • createdAtMillis - 1688460290932
  • 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 - 0
  • 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 - 1675176417141874688E885231222A8461BF54B522BCBC64818C83B0A29C3301BC9F31ABEEDCE2BE445