Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-01-24 10:39:59 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 825364898422B7E3B03649D3A7029C1B104FBEF4665D8228D5CD52C895643FC1
Participant Details

Original Note:

Per US Supreme Court, there's no hate speech exception to the free speech rights¹, thus you can't simultaneously protect free speech and tackle hate speech, thus the mandate is self-contradictory, thus the claim that it's clear is false. ¹https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_speech_in_the_United_States#:~:text=In%20a%20Supreme%20Court%20case%20on%20the%20issue%2C%20Matal%20v.%20Tam%20(2017)%2C%20the%20justices%20unanimously%20reaffirmed%20that%20there%20is%20effectively%20no%20%22hate%20speech%22%20exception%20to%20the%20free%20speech%20rights%20protected%20by%20the%20First%20Amendment

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1749847323708883060
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 825364898422B7E3B03649D3A7029C1B104FBEF4665D8228D5CD52C895643FC1
  • createdAtMillis - 1706092799724
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1749847323708883060825364898422B7E3B03649D3A7029C1B104FBEF4665D8228D5CD52C895643FC1