How Human-Rights Researchers Can Prepare Sensitive Footage for Review

For human-rights research, create a separate review copy when participants' identities are unnecessary for the current audience. Preserve the original under the project's evidence and security procedures, and record what was changed in the derivative.

An internal review copy and a public release are different deliverables. Do not let the first quietly become the second.

Define the review question

A team assessing the sequence of an event may not need clear faces. A specialist performing source verification may need access to the original under tighter controls.

State the purpose before editing. That tells you whether to retain timing, surroundings, speech, or particular visual details in the review copy.

Avoid removing context that the reviewer needs to interpret the scene accurately.

Preserve the relationship to the original

Record the source identifier, selected time range, and transformations: face treatment, crop, muted audio, or shortened sections.

Use the project's established provenance process. Do not invent a legal chain-of-custody claim merely because you saved two files.

For broader ethical and evidentiary considerations, consult WITNESS's video-as-evidence resources.

Choose an approved processing path

Unseen's local mode can perform face processing on the device. That may suit a project that prohibits uploading source media, provided the device and tool use are approved for the project.

Prepare the engine before disconnecting if you need an offline workflow. Keep the working source and downloaded result in the project's controlled storage.

Local mode does not encrypt a shared folder, prevent screen capture, or govern what recipients do with the export.

Review the useful and identifying details together

Masking should not hide the action the reviewer needs to see. At the same time, faces are not the only identifiers: voice, tattoos, clothing, surrounding people, and locations may matter.

Inspect every relevant appearance in the derivative. For crowded footage, review different image areas on separate passes. Record misses with timestamps and source references.

If the software cannot cover a needed interval reliably, use an approved manual correction method or limit access to the unmodified source instead of describing an incomplete redaction as finished.

Send the copy with a short note

Identify the permitted review purpose, relevant limitations, and how it relates to the source. For example, explain that faces are obscured and the audio is unchanged, rather than leaving the reviewer to infer what was altered.

Do not attach the original out of habit when only the derivative is required.

Before any public use, conduct a separate release review. A copy suitable for a small research team may still expose participants when paired with public captions or other footage.