Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-09-25 10:03:12 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 065E0DD481C5F1E121691AAEB99A9FE3D593D102C04B18F89A1772EB4F834E4C
Participant Details

Original Note:

while he was not proven to be innocent, it’s also important to note the main reason his case got media storm attention was due to new evidence suggesting he was not at the crime, along with confirmation the evidence was tampered with and was not allowed the investigation.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1838819493201444868
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 065E0DD481C5F1E121691AAEB99A9FE3D593D102C04B18F89A1772EB4F834E4C
  • createdAtMillis - 1727258592983
  • 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 - 0
  • ratingsId - 1838819493201444868065E0DD481C5F1E121691AAEB99A9FE3D593D102C04B18F89A1772EB4F834E4C