Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2024-11-26 07:01:04 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 1D4E89EF79D94A2BF763FF8845437F95D9F01AF46D19C9B05D721CCF244E515C
Participant Details

Original Note:

報道機関が裏取りをしなかった例がいくつあったとしても、通常の報道で裏取りのコストをかけていないという証拠にはなりません。

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1861269311241015368
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 1D4E89EF79D94A2BF763FF8845437F95D9F01AF46D19C9B05D721CCF244E515C
  • createdAtMillis - 1732604464338
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 1
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 1
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 18612693112410153681D4E89EF79D94A2BF763FF8845437F95D9F01AF46D19C9B05D721CCF244E515C