Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-10 18:30:28 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 006C9B4C2FD02DF16EEAF975BFFDA972F64C4A79BCE7EB1CEB43E00F39BD63FE
Participant Details

Original Note:

NNN - The other note mentions a newer pew research study but disregards how the new one directly contradicts the older pew data which the economist article uses and ignores the fact that both can't be correct at the same time, one or both must be heavily biased.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1844409548804600101
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 006C9B4C2FD02DF16EEAF975BFFDA972F64C4A79BCE7EB1CEB43E00F39BD63FE
  • createdAtMillis - 1728585028132
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - HELPFUL
  • helpfulOther - 1
  • helpfulInformative - 0
  • helpfulClear - 1
  • helpfulEmpathetic - 0
  • helpfulGoodSources - 0
  • 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 - 1844409548804600101006C9B4C2FD02DF16EEAF975BFFDA972F64C4A79BCE7EB1CEB43E00F39BD63FE