Metadata embedded in the video and analyzed by WIRED and independent video forensics experts shows that rather than being a direct export from the prison’s surveillance system, the footage was modified, likely using the professional editing tool Adobe Premiere Pro.
They literally said they color corrected and enhanced parts of it for visibility. So yes, the footage was modified.
But why? News agencies can do that if they wish, for the viewers, but why would a government agency releasing video evidence touch it up in any way? That’s just asking for questions.
I would assume it’s to make the metadata seem more reasonable, so people pay less attention to the cut. ‘The “perfectly innocent” act of “touching it up” is the reason the metadata says what it does, not because we removed part of it. Don’t look any closer!’
Yeah I agree. Pretty sure the whole trust part goes out the window when you aren’t releasing the actual raw footage to the press.