Mark Richards, one of Kyle Rittenhouse’s lawyers, argued that using an iPad to zoom in on a video should not be allowed because Apple’s AI creates “what it thinks is there, not what necessarily is there.” Judge Bruce Schroeder totally bought into that possibility and ruled that the jurors were only allowed to view the video in its original size.
Is it true? Does the pinch-and-zoom capability on an iPad alter an image? The actual answer doesn’t matter. The obvious and most important point is that the ability (or simply a path) to cast doubt on the veracity of video documentation is all that is needed to stoke the fears and taint the minds of anyone not schooled in the art.
Importantly, without close analysis of a video file, no one is technically capable of 100% certainty. Now, add in deepfakes and the near ubiquitous use of computational photography to enhance smartphone images as they are taken and we have the recipe for a “that’s not a real image” defense for every image presented.
Author’s note: This is not a sponsored post. I am the author of this article and it expresses my own opinions. I am not, nor is my company, receiving compensation for it.
About Shelly Palmer
Shelly Palmer is the Professor of Advanced Media in Residence at Syracuse University’s S.I. Newhouse School of Public Communications and CEO of The Palmer Group, a consulting practice that helps Fortune 500 companies with AI strategy, implementation and governance, as well as technology, media and marketing. Named one of LinkedIn’s Top Voices in Technology, he is a bestselling author, covers tech and business for Fox 5’s Good Day New York, is a regular commentator on CNN, and writes the popular daily business blog Think About This. Follow @shellypalmer or visit shellypalmer.com.