Editing
Part of Customer case study videos
Editing a case story without manufacturing a success narrative
Check interview joins, supporting footage, graphics, captions and short cuts against the customer’s account and evidence.
When you edit a customer case video, check what each finished scene leads a viewer to believe. A truthful excerpt can mislead if its question, condition, image or caption changes. Keep the cut tied to the customer’s account and to the evidence behind any claimed result.
Audit the strongest scenes first
Find the scenes that carry the main endorsement or result. For each, write the claim a new viewer is likely to take away. Compare it with the original question and surrounding answer, any correction the speaker made, and the record behind a factual graphic. If the source supports only a narrower statement, narrow the scene.
| Edit element | Question to ask |
|---|---|
| Interview join | Does the joined answer keep its subject, time and condition? |
| Bridge or voiceover | Is every added fact supported without inventing a motive? |
| Supporting footage | Does it show the setting rather than imply an unproved result? |
| Graphic or title | Does its wording match the checked measure and scope? |
| Caption | Does it preserve limiting words and the finished audio? |
A line about a trial team should not become an organisation-wide claim because the edit removed “trial” or showed footage from several sites. Restore the boundary in the scene or choose different material.
Check what picture and sound add
A relevant shot can orient the viewer to work the customer discussed. It cannot prove that work improved.
If a scene is reconstructed or footage is illustrative, make that clear where its documentary status matters. Watch for a later interface shown as though it existed during the customer’s project, or an optional feature paired with a statement about a standard service.
Play the scene at normal speed with sound. Music, pacing and a prominent title can make a cautious answer sound unconditional. A small, fleeting qualification may not correct the larger impression. Adjust the scene itself rather than relying on a closing note.
Balancing persuasive editing with factual integrity
- ProsVisuals can orient viewers to context and improve understanding of customer work.
- ConsFootage may imply unproven results if not clearly labelled as illustrative or reconstructed.
Check every alternate cut on its own
A short preview or advert is a separate communication. View it without the longer video: can someone identify whose experience it is, which part of the work it covers and any condition needed to interpret its strongest line? Return material changes to the relevant approver. A previously approved frame does not automatically make every new sequence or placement approved.
Review the export against the source
Watch the final export once without stopping and note its apparent claims. Then check those impressions against the source interview and claim record. Ask the speaker whether selected statements retain their meaning and the responsible claim owner whether factual narration and graphics remain supportable. Check captions against the final audio, particularly words such as “only”, “may” and period labels.
The ACCC can require businesses to back up claims they make about their products or services. If a scene leaves a broader impression than its source supports, revise that scene before release.
ACCC requirements for substantiating claims
- Businesses must back up claims about products or servicesRequired by ACCC under consumer protection laws
- Claims must reflect source evidenceNo broader impression than original statement supports
- Captions must preserve qualifiersWords like 'only', 'may' and period labels must remain accurate
