Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-04-22 19:05:26 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: FB1EB980E383BDEFC5E7748D4616C917A57E2A0BE4B0AFFF3BDA4512590B6E9F
Participant Details

Original Note:

The original post by @DramaAlert is factually wrong. Infact, Supreme Court has held back High Court order. Culprit claimed that he inadvertently watched child Prn. Child Prs remains illegal in India under Section 14 of the POCSO Act. 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 - 1782467824851591231
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - FB1EB980E383BDEFC5E7748D4616C917A57E2A0BE4B0AFFF3BDA4512590B6E9F
  • createdAtMillis - 1713812726708
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • helpfulUniqueContext - 0
  • helpfulAddressesClaim - 1
  • helpfulImportantContext - 1
  • helpfulUnbiasedLanguage - 1
  • 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 - 1782467824851591231FB1EB980E383BDEFC5E7748D4616C917A57E2A0BE4B0AFFF3BDA4512590B6E9F