Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-08-07 11:11:37 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: EB6D7ABB67999B61226613C581958C0E9D96646BC794EE3937A2A7A23B6164F5
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 - EB6D7ABB67999B61226613C581958C0E9D96646BC794EE3937A2A7A23B6164F5
  • createdAtMillis - 1723029097619
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 1
  • ratingsId - 1821001429806461113EB6D7ABB67999B61226613C581958C0E9D96646BC794EE3937A2A7A23B6164F5