relaxable said: Hi Ben! Concerning Anita Sarkeesian, I feel really conflicted. I mean, the evidence is clear - concerning her screencap of "death threats", that twitter page, account and screenshot are all fabricated and it is so obvious. Why is the person logged out? Why is there nothing indicated in the search bar? The person has no picture, and those tweets are said person's only tweets - why? 12 seconds since the most recent tweet after the screenshot? It's scripted. It's clear that she made the account.
I am not always logged into twitter. You can view an account while logged out. My guess is that she saw the tweets on her phone and went to the nearest computer to get a screenshot.
She went to the account’s url directly. Nothing needs to be in the search bar for that.
The person clearly created a throwaway account so they could harass her. They didn’t bother uploading an avatar so it went to the default twitter avatar. Usually these accounts are created using a IP address proxy so they cannot be tracked.
Since they created the account for that singular purpose, that is why those are the only tweets.
Clearly the person was writing all of this in a rant like state. Publishing them one after the other. It is totally within the realm of possibility that she took a screenshot in the middle of the rant, explaining the 12 second tweet.
I’ve actually had attacks very similar to this. Where someone creates an account just to threaten and harass me.
I’ve analyzed the image she posted, compared it with what twitter looks like when logged out, and there is no manipulation.
The only way it could be faked is if she created the account herself and screencapped the results.
I find that highly unlikely because I have personally seen hundreds of comments, tweets, and messages of harassment and threats directed at her. Basically go into any comment thread where her videos are discussed.
She doesn’t need to fabricate these things. She has plenty of authentic samples to choose from. I can’t even imagine what her email inbox looks like.
The part that makes it scary is that the person had her address.
Whoever told you this did some very shoddy detective work. In my personal opinion, all of the evidence shows that it is authentic. Especially since it closely mirrors harassment I have received in the past.
I’m also a little disturbed how willing people are to blame the victim. Studies have shown that “false victimhood” is actually very rare and it is prudent to always give the person the benefit of the doubt. What if this was a real threat, the police were like, “I don’t believe you” and then something happened to her.
Be very careful with things like this. Victim blaming can have serious consequences you may not be aware of.
And “debunks” like this, where someone says “oh the page is clearly faked for xyz reasons,” are almost always a calculated lie. Sure, not everyone will believe you, but a LOT of people will be inclined to believe you no matter how shoddy your proof, and a lot of people will be impressed by the confidence with which you announce “it’s a fake!”
For every actual logical rebuttal like Frogman’s, there are probably ten more people who see this “proof” and become convinced Sarkeesian is lying about the whole - despite the PLETHORA of publicly visible evidence that there are people who are willing to threaten her.
If you spread the lie that Sarkeesian is faking her harassment, you are complicit in that harassment. You are aiding her harassers. Stop it.
And, really, give Twitter’s abysmal record of refusing to enforce their terms of service against deleted tweets, how long would you wait after receiving a death threat before taking a screenshot?