Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-01-18 12:40:30 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: 4B0BF13B746BD5664AAED0416EF1E021507A2DAE4E0108BE8F018CEE5B3B7B5D
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 - 4B0BF13B746BD5664AAED0416EF1E021507A2DAE4E0108BE8F018CEE5B3B7B5D
  • createdAtMillis - 1737204030868
  • 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 - 1
  • 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 - 18802605432414087554B0BF13B746BD5664AAED0416EF1E021507A2DAE4E0108BE8F018CEE5B3B7B5D