Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-07-03 23:00:46 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: EA2B5473C069BA1ED7DD0BB1FDEFC5DAF5500253AA38EE9F9A560481380AE1F9
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 - EA2B5473C069BA1ED7DD0BB1FDEFC5DAF5500253AA38EE9F9A560481380AE1F9
  • createdAtMillis - 1688425246052
  • 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 - 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 - 1675993690920169473EA2B5473C069BA1ED7DD0BB1FDEFC5DAF5500253AA38EE9F9A560481380AE1F9