How to check a news screenshot against the original article

Write down what the screenshot actually contains

Record the visible headline, publisher name, author, date and any fragment of a web address. Separate text inside the screenshot from commentary added above or below it. A sender's summary may be much stronger than the wording in the image. If the screenshot is cropped, note which parts of the article are missing.

Do not start by judging fonts. Differences in app design, screen size or language can change a real article's appearance; an edited screenshot can copy the design perfectly. The useful question is whether you can trace the content to a publication and inspect what that publication actually says.

Search for a distinctive phrase, then the publisher

Search a short, distinctive stretch of the headline in quotation marks. If that fails, remove the quotation marks and combine unusual names or terms with the publisher's name. Google also supports site: followed immediately by a domain to narrow a search. Confirm that you have the publisher's real domain before using it.

Use the publisher's own search or archive as a second route. Try spelling variations, another language used by the publication, and a few words from the article body if visible. A translated screenshot may not reproduce an exact headline. These variations are attempts to locate evidence, not a reason to assume the screenshot is genuine.

Compare the complete article, not just its headline

Once you locate a candidate, open it and compare the subject, author, date, image and distinctive wording. Read enough of the article to understand qualifications. A headline might describe a proposal, a prediction, an allegation, or a question. Removing those distinctions can turn an accurate report into a misleading message.

Look for an update or correction and check whether the screenshot predates it. Sometimes the article exists but its headline has changed. The current page alone cannot prove what the earlier headline was. Where available, a reliable archived copy or the publisher's own correction note can help establish that history.

• Publication: did this publisher actually publish the material?
• Timing: is it current, an older story, or a later update?
• Meaning: does the complete text support the message's interpretation?
• Evidence: what source does the article itself rely on?

Treat a missing article as an unresolved lead

A failed search is not proof that an article never existed. Pages can move, be removed, sit behind access restrictions or escape search indexing. Search by the visible author and topic, inspect any correction page, and look for references that lead back to a genuine original. Do not turn a blank search into a confident accusation of fabrication.

If a reputable archive has a copy, inspect its recorded address and capture date. An archive preserves what it captured at that time; it does not certify the truth of the page's content. If access is unavailable, describe the limitation rather than filling the gap from a social-media paraphrase.

Explain precisely what changed

In this hypothetical example, a screenshot says a museum will close permanently. The matching article's headline says its east wing will close temporarily, and the body specifies renovation dates. The useful correction identifies those two differences and links the full article. There is no need to speculate about who edited the screenshot or why.

In another hypothetical case, the screenshot is an accurate copy of a three-year-old announcement. It may still mislead when shared as news from this week. Say that the image matches an older article and include its publication date; do not call the image fabricated.

Keep three possible outcomes available: you matched the screenshot to a source; you found a specific contradiction; or you could not establish its origin. If the article only repeats someone else's assertion, continue to that underlying evidence before treating the event as confirmed. Authentic publication and a verified claim are separate findings.

Common questions

Is a publisher's logo enough to verify a screenshot?

No. A logo can be copied. Locate the material on the publisher's own site or another reliable record of its publication, then inspect the complete context.

What if the headline changed?

Look for an update, correction or reliable archived version. Describe the difference you can establish; a change does not by itself show whether the screenshot was edited.

Should I share the screenshot after finding the article?

Prefer the full article link with its date and a short accurate explanation. Check that the article actually supports the claim rather than merely mentioning it.