Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-04 10:03:38 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 8CF5359AAC1038C8B347B49FC2B4EDF64C9B2B2BB20B058AB2D03A496DB78D58
Participant Details

Original Note:

The decision suggests a business can refuse to offer what the court called expressive services if doing so would run contrary to their beliefs. But that’s different from other businesses not engaged in speech and therefore not covered by the First Amendment. https://apnews.com/article/supreme-court-gay-rights-website-designer-aa529361bc939c837ec2ece216b296d5

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1675993690920169473
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 8CF5359AAC1038C8B347B49FC2B4EDF64C9B2B2BB20B058AB2D03A496DB78D58
  • createdAtMillis - 1688465018265
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - NOT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 0
  • helpfulImportantContext - 0
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 0
  • notHelpfulOther - 0
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 16759936909201694738CF5359AAC1038C8B347B49FC2B4EDF64C9B2B2BB20B058AB2D03A496DB78D58