Birdwatch Archive

Birdwatch Note Rating

2025-01-18 23:41:09 UTC - SOMEWHAT_HELPFUL

Rated by Participant: E26FE5F7F6CBAD0A6BBE33E23863CF345B7911FC0278F4E6CA6D12357344B695
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 - E26FE5F7F6CBAD0A6BBE33E23863CF345B7911FC0278F4E6CA6D12357344B695
  • createdAtMillis - 1737243669990
  • version - 2
  • agree - 0
  • disagree - 0
  • helpful - 0
  • notHelpful - 0
  • helpfulnessLevel - SOMEWHAT_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 - 1880260543241408755E26FE5F7F6CBAD0A6BBE33E23863CF345B7911FC0278F4E6CA6D12357344B695