Human rights groups, journalists, and “open source investigators” increasingly depend on social media platforms to collect eyewitness media documenting possible human rights violations and conflicts. And yet, this content—often graphic, controversial, even uploaded by perpetrators—is often removed by the platforms, for various reasons. This article draws on in-depth interviews to examine how practitioners reliant on human rights–related content understand, experience, and deal with platform content moderation and removals in their day-to-day work. Interviews highlighted that both the actual and anticipated removal of social media content complicated and added to practitioners’ work. In addition, practitioners unevenly possess the technical, financial, and organizational resources to mitigate the risks and ramifications of removal by preserving content and appealing content moderation decisions. This article sheds light on the impacts of content moderation for stakeholders other than the primary account holders, and highlights platforms’ affordances and shortcomings as archives of war.