Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-01-18 01:58:21 UTC - HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: D63BA2577380C81F82C6E69AF8C04E1E8D5CBE2775A1B966AB85A4A1F2ABD1DE
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 - D63BA2577380C81F82C6E69AF8C04E1E8D5CBE2775A1B966AB85A4A1F2ABD1DE
  • createdAtMillis - 1737165501365
  • 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 - 1880260543241408755D63BA2577380C81F82C6E69AF8C04E1E8D5CBE2775A1B966AB85A4A1F2ABD1DE