Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-03-19 14:44:59 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: E6D5F0E4898BFB4BDFF927EAEB4918AE93AF03B72C706009AD91C0E2522E7C16
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN. Citing a 20-year old poll as a credible source on the reliability of a media outlet is akin to thinking that a Google spokesman saying "We investigated ourselves for interference and decided that we didn't do it" as somehow being proof that Google is unbiased.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1769950273991287179
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - E6D5F0E4898BFB4BDFF927EAEB4918AE93AF03B72C706009AD91C0E2522E7C16
  • createdAtMillis - 1710859499110
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1769950273991287179E6D5F0E4898BFB4BDFF927EAEB4918AE93AF03B72C706009AD91C0E2522E7C16