Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-26 07:49:57 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 27350B6DDDCB118C3B94BF7CC41424166518E94C3E31CBA49B4A4FC77A89D485
Participant Details

Original Note:

Article falsely states that Forstater judgment called GC beliefs “profoundly offensive and distressing”. Instead, the judgment said [116] BOTH GC beliefs AND the author’s beliefs “may well be [p.o & d] to many others” but [118a] did not comment on merit of either belief. https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/60c1cce1d3bf7f4bd9814e39/Maya_Forstater_v_CGD_Europe_and_others_UKEAT0105_20_JOJ.pdf

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1708532608315900383
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 27350B6DDDCB118C3B94BF7CC41424166518E94C3E31CBA49B4A4FC77A89D485
  • createdAtMillis - 1698306597661
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 0
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • 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 - 170853260831590038327350B6DDDCB118C3B94BF7CC41424166518E94C3E31CBA49B4A4FC77A89D485