Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-12 15:53:00 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: BB62A82DF67EB3403C2670EAFED8A3C5F4566D2E71469D908BC05AB5241EF775
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN. The headline and tweet correctly summarize the results of the study. There is no evidence that the study was methodologically flawed or that the peer review process was flawed. Save your objects for the comments.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1778604888173236694
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - BB62A82DF67EB3403C2670EAFED8A3C5F4566D2E71469D908BC05AB5241EF775
  • createdAtMillis - 1712937180510
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulIncorrect - 0
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 1
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1778604888173236694BB62A82DF67EB3403C2670EAFED8A3C5F4566D2E71469D908BC05AB5241EF775