Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-02-15 16:26:14 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 79A4C0C647C7683A521A8E2D786A5F1F25166C44DA2666A7A4B88CDE944FE079
Participant Details

Original Note:

This is clearly satire The original post was written by the same journalist who wrote the WSJ article (He mentions he was a WSJ journalist & was recently laid off) It is a satirical response to the content of the original post, using the writer’s own article as advice (in jest)

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1758125896614154658
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 79A4C0C647C7683A521A8E2D786A5F1F25166C44DA2666A7A4B88CDE944FE079
  • createdAtMillis - 1708014374123
  • 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 - 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 - 175812589661415465879A4C0C647C7683A521A8E2D786A5F1F25166C44DA2666A7A4B88CDE944FE079