Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-09-25 15:32:21 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: FD166033C2892BE5F73254CAC8840FDE0510BDDB45B175475B5637AE7DE6430B
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 - FD166033C2892BE5F73254CAC8840FDE0510BDDB45B175475B5637AE7DE6430B
  • createdAtMillis - 1727278341754
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 1838819493201444868FD166033C2892BE5F73254CAC8840FDE0510BDDB45B175475B5637AE7DE6430B