An unexplained clip is unresolved evidence. It is not automatic proof of the most extraordinary explanation.
RESEARCH · EXPLAINED
Start with the claim, not the goosebumps
Before analyzing a video, write down the exact claim attached to it. A bright object appears in a sky is different from an alien craft visited a city last night. The second claim adds an identity, a place, and a time that the pixels alone may not establish. This distinction is the starting point of our editorial workflow.
1. Trace the earliest available version
Save the public post’s URL, its caption, and the date you encountered it. Look for the creator or an earlier upload rather than assuming the most popular account recorded the scene. Bellingcat’s verification examples show why source tracing matters: authentic older footage can acquire a false contemporary caption. An upload date establishes when that copy appeared, not necessarily when it was filmed. [1]
2. Search several frames
Take screenshots from distinctive moments and run reverse-image searches. Try a wide view and a detail with a recognizable sign or building. Bellingcat describes using frames and thumbnails to locate earlier copies. No match is inconclusive: search results depend on what has been indexed and how the image has been altered. [2]
3. Check the surrounding story
Compare visible landmarks, language, and other contextual details with the claimed location. Seek independently sourced reports of the same event rather than multiple accounts repeating one upload. Bellingcat’s examples show how text searches and visual clues can expose a misidentified setting. Record which details you confirmed and which remain assumptions. [1]
4. Treat provenance as one piece of evidence
Where Content Credentials are available, inspect them. They can provide information about the asset’s recorded history, but validating a provenance record does not establish that every claim in the caption is true. A missing record is not proof of fakery either. [3]
5. Write a conclusion that fits the evidence
Use a narrow verdict: earlier footage found; location confirmed; creator identifies it as fiction; or origin unresolved. Explain what supports that verdict and what would change it. Avoid accusing an uploader of deliberate deception when you have only established that their caption is wrong. If you cannot resolve the clip, say so. A careful unresolved result is more useful than a confident story unsupported by the evidence.
Bring us the source
Have a clip worth examining? Use Submit a Mystery and include the original public URL, the exact claim, and any earlier versions you found. The submission page prepares an email draft; you must send it from your own email app. Please do not publish private personal information to make a case seem more convincing.
Sources and further reading
- Bellingcat — A Beginner’s Guide to Social Media Verification (2021)
- Bellingcat — Advanced Guide on Verifying Video Content (2017)
- C2PA — Content Credentials technical specification
Sources checked September 29, 2026. Written with AI assistance using the linked sources. Explanatory examples and editorial analysis are distinguished from reported findings. Send a correction or source.