Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2023-10-31 23:53:37 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: E73A94A5D72255FDFB8A9EC74BA48ACAAF2977846AE4CAA2B691C5B7E4799E8E
Participant Details

Original Note:

O número apresentado em algumas notas de "23%" é de outra metodologia. Analistas explicam que os dados não se comparam com o novo Caged: https://g1.globo.com/economia/noticia/2021/04/28/serie-historica-do-emprego-formal-nao-pode-ser-comparada-com-novo-caged-dizem-analistas.ghtml

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1719499403927724365
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - E73A94A5D72255FDFB8A9EC74BA48ACAAF2977846AE4CAA2B691C5B7E4799E8E
  • createdAtMillis - 1698796417732
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • 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 - 1719499403927724365E73A94A5D72255FDFB8A9EC74BA48ACAAF2977846AE4CAA2B691C5B7E4799E8E