Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-05-28 17:14:24 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1DB02E32BC4ACA472BE148248CA5C0944CB4172EDEB2AE6C9F5BAAD4797C8D52
Participant Details

Original Note:

The NYT story has not been “thoroughly debunked”. A couple of its claims have been questioned, but no serious inaccuracies have been found. https://edition.cnn.com/2024/03/01/media/ny-times-stands-by-reporting-hamas/index.html

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1795295041717416379
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1DB02E32BC4ACA472BE148248CA5C0944CB4172EDEB2AE6C9F5BAAD4797C8D52
  • createdAtMillis - 1716916464864
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 17952950417174163791DB02E32BC4ACA472BE148248CA5C0944CB4172EDEB2AE6C9F5BAAD4797C8D52