i think the point is to be able to say “this video was released by X, and X signed it so they must have released it, and you can validate that yourself”.
it means if you see a logo that shows CNN, and its signed by CNN, then you know for sure that CNN released it. As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc, but they can at least be held to account at that point.
versus random ai generated video with a fake logo and fake attribution that is going viral and not being able to be discredited in time before it becomes truth.
Why not link to the original CNN source then, if you want to be trusted? You’d have to do that anyways if you want to use the CNN footage in your own video.
I don’t think people who care about the validity of a news video will be helped much with this, and people who don’t care about the truth can easily ignore it too.
As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc
But what if they can’t anymore? News orgs don’t only show video that they recorded. They have videos from freelance reporters, people who were at an event, government orgs, other news orgs in other countries…
sure, totally ok to incorporate those video items & publish your (signed) story. i think we’ve seen pretty clesrly that people want to publish and be recognised for their publications.
building a web of trust has to start somewhere.
currently we’re in the “its all very difficult, we cant solve all the tricky things, so we’re not even trying” stage.
hopefully we find a way to move forward, even if its not perfect.
… so make the phones do it?
i mean, its not rocket surgery.
Sign every video automatically? Sounds like chatcontrol all over.
Also, I could just generate a video on my computer and film it with my phone. Now it’s signed, even has phone artifacts for added realism.
i think the point is to be able to say “this video was released by X, and X signed it so they must have released it, and you can validate that yourself”. it means if you see a logo that shows CNN, and its signed by CNN, then you know for sure that CNN released it. As a news organisation they should have their own due diligence about sources etc, but they can at least be held to account at that point. versus random ai generated video with a fake logo and fake attribution that is going viral and not being able to be discredited in time before it becomes truth.
Why not link to the original CNN source then, if you want to be trusted? You’d have to do that anyways if you want to use the CNN footage in your own video.
I don’t think people who care about the validity of a news video will be helped much with this, and people who don’t care about the truth can easily ignore it too.
But what if they can’t anymore? News orgs don’t only show video that they recorded. They have videos from freelance reporters, people who were at an event, government orgs, other news orgs in other countries…
sure, totally ok to incorporate those video items & publish your (signed) story. i think we’ve seen pretty clesrly that people want to publish and be recognised for their publications. building a web of trust has to start somewhere. currently we’re in the “its all very difficult, we cant solve all the tricky things, so we’re not even trying” stage. hopefully we find a way to move forward, even if its not perfect.