Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-01-18 04:16:21 UTC - NOT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 28EA817E1F10CE313BFAD6D46E0C575FBF2E118BC4C8650681CF22F2EEE5A59D
Participant Details

Original Note:

The post is a personal expression of confusion at the seemingly inferred positive reframing of Pedophilia highlighted in the article title. No CN needed. NYT choices for article titles should be open to public commentary.

All Note Details

Original Tweet

All Information

  • noteId - 1880260543241408755
  • participantId -
  • raterParticipantId - 28EA817E1F10CE313BFAD6D46E0C575FBF2E118BC4C8650681CF22F2EEE5A59D
  • createdAtMillis - 1737173781536
  • 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 - 1
  • notHelpfulSourcesMissingOrUnreliable - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculationOrBias - 0
  • notHelpfulMissingKeyPoints - 0
  • notHelpfulOutdated - 0
  • notHelpfulHardToUnderstand - 0
  • notHelpfulArgumentativeOrBiased - 0
  • notHelpfulOffTopic - 0
  • notHelpfulSpamHarassmentOrAbuse - 0
  • notHelpfulIrrelevantSources - 0
  • notHelpfulOpinionSpeculation - 0
  • notHelpfulNoteNotNeeded - 0
  • ratingsId - 188026054324140875528EA817E1F10CE313BFAD6D46E0C575FBF2E118BC4C8650681CF22F2EEE5A59D