3 ms·

It's usually done to preserve a tweet that could end up getting deleted.

• Nadya 11y ago
  Which is meaningless due to how easily screenshots could be doctored. It's no better than "this is what they said". http://i.imgur.com/jcnkw71.png http://i.imgur.com/jcnkw71.png Having multiple screenshots from multiple sources increases the likelihood of legitimacy - but doesn't guarantee it. 20 people can easily get together and doctor the same statement.
  • rev_bird 11y ago
    It's no more reliable than "this is what they said," but it adds a step to the fabrication: I could just type random quotes and attribute them to a Twitter account, sure, but it would take effort to fake a screenshot.
    • eridius 11y ago
      For anyone who's passingly familiar with HTML and the web developer tools built into modern browsers, it's barely more effort than "this is what they said". In most cases it's literally right-click, Inspect Element, double-click the html node and replace it with the contents of your choosing.
  • Karunamon 11y ago
    For reference, if you want to archive something in such a way to preserve its legitimacy, use a site like http://archive.is- http://archive.is- it's an automated third party process with the original URL attached. There is no doctoring happening there.