Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-01 21:17:08 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: C677586BC3C25C2D84B15C55BBA030AC8F7FB7169B1B3B722B50C56B27DC3EC6
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN - check the byline. This is an editorial, not an op-ed. There is no other piece published on WSJ that covers this story. This is 100% how WSJ covered the issue. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Editorial

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1753057781509128652
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - C677586BC3C25C2D84B15C55BBA030AC8F7FB7169B1B3B722B50C56B27DC3EC6
  • createdAtMillis - 1706822228675
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - 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 - 1753057781509128652C677586BC3C25C2D84B15C55BBA030AC8F7FB7169B1B3B722B50C56B27DC3EC6