Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-07 13:14:14 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 0A5A303D272B5DF8FB49D20E689A0E42DCA858056D92EB1E3A931BE9B38E287E
Participant Details

Original Note:

The suggested note is not correct. Cambridge Analytica, while controversial, was a data collection firm. Neither Cambridge nor the Trump campaign did not pay influencers to post on social media on their behalf as the suggested note claims. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/04/us/politics/cambridge-analytica-scandal-fallout.html

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1821001429806461113
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 0A5A303D272B5DF8FB49D20E689A0E42DCA858056D92EB1E3A931BE9B38E287E
  • createdAtMillis - 1723036454420
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 0
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 1
  • 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 - 18210014298064611130A5A303D272B5DF8FB49D20E689A0E42DCA858056D92EB1E3A931BE9B38E287E