Check whether a circulating tweet, article or chat screenshot is real. Forging one takes seconds with browser dev tools.
Check whether a circulating tweet, article or chat screenshot is real. Forging one takes seconds with browser dev tools. Free with no sign-up, and the analysis runs inside your browser — files never leave your device. On our public gate (30 real + 52 AI images) it measured 96.3% at original quality and 91.5% on recompressed copies, with zero real photos confidently mislabelled as AI. Treat it as an indicator, not proof: the newest commercial generators evade every detector.
A tweet, article or chat "screenshot" is the cheapest forgery there is — edit the text in a browser, capture, done. The key check is not image analysis but whether the original actually exists.
Find the original on the real account or outlet; if deleted, web archives often keep a trace. Reverse-search the capture to see if it was used for a different event before. Then run the pixel check — this site's editing-trace (ELA) tool can show whether the text region was recompressed differently from the rest.
Number contradictions are great clues too — more shares than views, a post older than the account, timestamps in impossible time zones. Forgers rarely get the details right.
"Captured before deletion" is also the standard forgery excuse. Without independent secondary evidence — web archives, press quotes, other witnesses — it is safest to treat it as unconfirmed.
No — ELA is an observational tool that shows recompression differences and reacts to normal edits too. Its value grows when it stacks with a missing original and number contradictions.