Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-06 18:09:56 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 015EF949CC561DD1C4D9D280A412D22A8B38286592F6F7EDB1F2996F2613D350
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN - people do understand that this is not about individual companies deciding to seize advertising, but about rating companies going after certain platforms without merit, which is illegal in antitrust terms.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1820850519629279561
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 015EF949CC561DD1C4D9D280A412D22A8B38286592F6F7EDB1F2996F2613D350
  • createdAtMillis - 1722967796089
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1820850519629279561015EF949CC561DD1C4D9D280A412D22A8B38286592F6F7EDB1F2996F2613D350