Birdwatch Archive - Rating Details

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-01 17:02:31 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 22C33D6C8E0FA895D1D2DD634A6F931AECE3E8DE2E89EE4CB5F2D80AA7600208
Participant Details

Original Note:

Dieser Post ist irreführend. Das Urteil spricht Correctiv in 2/3 der Punkte recht zu, wobei der dritte Punkt nicht in direkten Zusammenhang mit den Kernpunkten des Artikels hängt. Es handelte sich um eine Nebenklage https://justiz.hamburg.de/gerichte/oberlandesgericht/gerichtspressestelle/unterlassungsantrag-gegen-correctiv-berichterstattung-nur-teilweise-erfolgreich--705854

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

noteId - 1763535282144424104
participantId -
raterParticipantId - 22C33D6C8E0FA895D1D2DD634A6F931AECE3E8DE2E89EE4CB5F2D80AA7600208
createdAtMillis - 1709312551487
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 - 1
notHelpfulOutdated - 0
notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
ratingsId - 176353528214442410422C33D6C8E0FA895D1D2DD634A6F931AECE3E8DE2E89EE4CB5F2D80AA7600208