Would you consider a YouTube video to be evidence?

[Anonymous]

If somebody wants to claim to me a certain politician said something.

I would consider a Youtube video to be sufficient evidence.

Updates

6 mo

It may be in the future but AI isn’t that good these days. You can usually tell what is AI and what is not

[Chazmatazz269]

If there are multiple videos showing the same thing from different sources and perspectives, it’s adequate. Otherwise, AI and deep fakes are extremely common on user driven media sites. Not taking such things with a healthy sense of skepticism is just plain foolish.

[Kaneki05]

Well it's better than News Channels that lie or have clear bias. Youtube is more free source which I find much more reliable of course you still need to think and not trust just want some random posted or certain bias creators and make your own mind up.

[Razp_Sorbet]

Not necessarily, a trusted news source would be better. AI is wild lately so anything can be fake

[Telekinetic-Potato]

It depends. You don't know the context, when the video was from and sometimes it's hard to tell if it's ai or not so you gotta find it again on social media and find the original account one of the angles came from

[NathanDavis]

editing software was already good enough to trick people...

AI has only made it much more easier, for those who actually know how to use it, so nowadays no...

a YouTube video is not evidence enough

[abc3643]

It would be in court if the video were analyzed for enhancements/begin fake, etc. Same as any other video submitted into evidence in court.

[msc545]

YouTube videos are easily altered and forged, and I would not consider one ever to be evidence.

[Anonymous]

it's better evidence than "reporting"

[Anonymous]

No troll.

[In_Trance]

Absolutely not