Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-10 17:22:57 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D55E4E1C649B4AB585DBE272AD880D9F9F9481DA0E3FF0F83A5E0F54ED13244A
Participant Details

Original Note:

The case in question is from 40 years ago. Current NYT policy, however, still contains many methods by which the organization could omit books it considers undesirable. https://www.nytimes.com/books/best-sellers/methodology/

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1766863179458482622
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - D55E4E1C649B4AB585DBE272AD880D9F9F9481DA0E3FF0F83A5E0F54ED13244A
  • createdAtMillis - 1710091377819
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1766863179458482622D55E4E1C649B4AB585DBE272AD880D9F9F9481DA0E3FF0F83A5E0F54ED13244A