ACORN video altered

What would you believe,video or your own recollection?
Without supporting video pumping up a media fury how far would the recent attack on ACORN have gone? Congress quickly caved and cut funding on the basis of a shock wave of pressure based on an altered video.
This past week a federal judge blocked U.S. officials from enforcing a funding ban on Acorn.
Questionable video evidence and a concerted right wing attack worked wonders. However after the dust settled and with some investigation; From a report commissioned by ACORN and conducted by former Massachusetts Attorney General Scott Harshbarger

The videos that have been released appear to have been edited, in some cases substantially, including the insertion of a substitute voiceover for significant portions of Mr. O'Keefe's and Ms. Giles's comments, which makes it difficult to determine the questions to which ACORN employees are responding. A comparison of the publicly available transcripts to the released videos confirms that large portions of the original video have been omitted from the released versions.

The power of video on memory
Researchers in England have found that faked video can alter a person’s perception of events that they were witnessed to and took part in. An amazing 50% of people shown footage of an event they participated in believed the altered video version rather than their own recollection of events. Participant took part in a computerized gambling task. The exercise involved a shared pile of money and prizes.

After the session, the video footage was doctored to make it look as if the member of the research team sat next to the subject was cheating by not putting money back into the bank.
One third of the subjects were told that the person sat next to them was suspected of cheating. Another third were told the person had been caught on camera cheating, and the remaining group was actually shown the fake video footage. All subjects were then asked to sign a statement only if they had seen the cheating take place.
Nearly 40% of the participants who had seen the doctored video complied. Another 10% of the group signed when asked a second time by the researchers. Only 10% of those who were told the incident had been caught on film but were not shown the video agreed to sign, and about 5% of the control group who were just told about the cheating signed the statement.