Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-10-10 19:39:51 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: FF46D9EDD0E15F1970C81FC9C922D98D88FA8FAE104D93BA4960B88C33F91665
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 - FF46D9EDD0E15F1970C81FC9C922D98D88FA8FAE104D93BA4960B88C33F91665
  • createdAtMillis - 1728589191871
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - 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 - 1844409548804600101FF46D9EDD0E15F1970C81FC9C922D98D88FA8FAE104D93BA4960B88C33F91665