Birdwatch Note Rating
2023-10-02 08:18:41 UTC - HELPFUL
Rated by Participant: B51A36658AB82C26D254782C7B59AE20B808E122088AD449E34A575F21891874
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