Questions from the Edit Room

No tool can replace source-based verification. AI may locate candidate records, compare transcriptions or suggest lines of inquiry. A researcher still needs to inspect the original or reliable copy, establish context, assess provenance and consider contradictory evidence. Treat an answer without a checkable source path as a lead, not a fact.

It is a draft transcript. Check significant quotations against the recording or document, especially names, dates, numbers, negations and contested wording. Preserve the reviewed version and explain material uncertainty instead of silently polishing an unclear passage.

It is not archival evidence and should never be presented as an original record. If a reconstruction is used, identify it clearly, document its inputs and edits, and avoid implying that a plausible generated scene depicts an actual event.

Record the tool and version where known, purpose, date, source material processed, meaningful prompts or settings, output, reviewer, corrections and resulting editorial decisions. Also establish where data is processed, retained and accessible before uploading sensitive material.

No. Access and reuse are different. Check copyright, repository conditions, donor restrictions, privacy and any separate rights in a scan, restoration or accompanying material. Confirm that permission covers the intended distribution and transformation.

Give each record a stable identifier and connect it to the exact page, frame or timecode, source repository, rights status, transformation history and script or shot that uses it. A concise claim ledger and shot log let a reviewer follow the chain without slowing every routine decision.

Only after checking consent, access restrictions, privacy, security, retention and vendor reuse terms. The interviewee’s consent may not cover a new automated process. For sensitive or restricted audio, use an authorized local method or do not process it with that service.

Make the disclosure clear and close to the material, so viewers can understand its status when it matters. Explain whether it is a reconstruction, illustration or substantial alteration. Keep the method and approvals in production records; an end-credit note alone may not prevent a misleading impression.

Describe the gap and the competing evidence. Seek records created from different perspectives and distinguish what is documented from what is inferred. If the evidence does not settle a question, let the film communicate that uncertainty rather than filling it with a fluent guess.