I think you need to be a bit more specific. What social media service?
Twitter can be archived by both archive.is and archive.org. A direct archive is superior to Nitter if you're just going for one tweet, as people often search archives of tweets by a given person.
Facebook used to be able to be archived with archive.is, but now you can only archive public pages AFAIK.
For any 'news' site that does not allow direct archiving, you can try doing outline.com or freezepage.com and then archiving that.
Some sites like Instagram don't allow access without logging in, and so can't be archived. It might be different if the people behind archive.is create an account there, like they have for twitter, but they don't at the moment.
Twitter can be archived, but they've disabled various links for archive.is. Like if you archive a quote tweet, you can see the quoted tweet, but the links to the original tweet or tweet author are disabled. This was something Twitter did in the last year. Nitter doesn't have this problem. Twitter also heavily reduces the number of tweets that can be seen on a profile page, and how many (if any) replies are shown, when archived.
If you visit the non-archived page, you can click on the link. It's the archived page where you can't. It's people that don't fit with Twitter's political bias that archive, so it makes sense they'd limit the quality of archives.
I use imginn.com to look at Instagram, since I don't have an account.
Thanks for the tip. I'll check this out.
https://github.com/iv-org/invidious for youtube https://github.com/spikecodes/libreddit for reddit https://git.sr.ht/~cadence/bibliogram for instagram
I think you need to be a bit more specific. What social media service?
Twitter can be archived by both archive.is and archive.org. A direct archive is superior to Nitter if you're just going for one tweet, as people often search archives of tweets by a given person.
Facebook used to be able to be archived with archive.is, but now you can only archive public pages AFAIK.
For any 'news' site that does not allow direct archiving, you can try doing outline.com or freezepage.com and then archiving that.
Some sites like Instagram don't allow access without logging in, and so can't be archived. It might be different if the people behind archive.is create an account there, like they have for twitter, but they don't at the moment.
Twitter can be archived, but they've disabled various links for archive.is. Like if you archive a quote tweet, you can see the quoted tweet, but the links to the original tweet or tweet author are disabled. This was something Twitter did in the last year. Nitter doesn't have this problem. Twitter also heavily reduces the number of tweets that can be seen on a profile page, and how many (if any) replies are shown, when archived.
Seems like shooting themselves in the foot. Typically they do everything they can to get you to go back to their site.
If you visit the non-archived page, you can click on the link. It's the archived page where you can't. It's people that don't fit with Twitter's political bias that archive, so it makes sense they'd limit the quality of archives.