Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-21 17:22:12 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 59A9CE4EBA1F247EAEA7DBA2DF82664635FBA4A027F01909664EED9C0AAE480D
Participant Details

Original Note:

This is taken out of context, as this is not a blanket law but instead just an excerpt from the below mentioned article. even though the verdict is still awful, this post tries to portray it as something it's not. https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/screserves-verdict-on-madras-hc-s-child-pornography-order-101713601280456.html

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1782086779056824470
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 59A9CE4EBA1F247EAEA7DBA2DF82664635FBA4A027F01909664EED9C0AAE480D
  • createdAtMillis - 1713720132814
  • 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 - 0
  • 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 - 178208677905682447059A9CE4EBA1F247EAEA7DBA2DF82664635FBA4A027F01909664EED9C0AAE480D