Take an example from a decade ago, one that sticks in my mind because it was so egregious.
One was a picture of a grieving mother in the rain at her son's grave. It was a private, solitary moment, showing her utter heartfelt grief. There was also video of the same scene. It aired on national tv.
Then there was the Getty photo original of the same shot. It showed the reporters' tent, the dozen photographers and videographers and vans and the food table set up for the photo op, along with the other reporters and the guys working the rebroadcast equipment in the van. Then there were the PR people and other supporters. A good 30-40 people were there for the solitary graveside moment. The unedited video showed her rehearsing the scene, getting her positions ironed out ahead of time so that the camera angles were just right. It took about 30 minutes to get the proper heartfelt, impromptu scene set up and make sure that the background didn't spoil the shot with people and equipment and food and tents and then close-ups and photocropping to remove all the hustle and bustle next to the woman.
It was a moving shot. And utterly staged and rehearsed to be moving.
You can do the same with video. Don't catch what triggered a response. Just get the response on video. Focus on the victim. You get what you want, and the viewer sees what you want. It's a quick and easy way to manipulate people. It's the unedited, unexpurgated version you want to see, with sufficient time leading up to the event and good coverage from multiple angles with easy audio that's important.
= new reply since forum marked as read
