Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-07 10:53:32 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 5136D98A34C68D4EB8A64EFAA0BCD4A1C9BA287A7A6ECBD1F4DCAC070F25EA04
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 - 5136D98A34C68D4EB8A64EFAA0BCD4A1C9BA287A7A6ECBD1F4DCAC070F25EA04
  • createdAtMillis - 1723028012698
  • 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 - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 18210014298064611135136D98A34C68D4EB8A64EFAA0BCD4A1C9BA287A7A6ECBD1F4DCAC070F25EA04