Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-10 17:53:07 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: BB62A82DF67EB3403C2670EAFED8A3C5F4566D2E71469D908BC05AB5241EF775
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 - BB62A82DF67EB3403C2670EAFED8A3C5F4566D2E71469D908BC05AB5241EF775
  • createdAtMillis - 1728582787539
  • 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 - 1844409548804600101BB62A82DF67EB3403C2670EAFED8A3C5F4566D2E71469D908BC05AB5241EF775