In a stark contrast to the unifying outrage that followed George Floyd’s death five years ago, the fatal shooting of Renee Good by an ICE agent has entered a much more complex media landscape where video evidence is simultaneously more plentiful and less conclusive.

When bystander footage captured Minneapolis police officer Derek Chauvin kneeling on Floyd’s neck for over nine minutes in May 2020, the visceral imagery catalyzed one of the nation’s largest social movements. The video’s clarity left little room for interpretation, ultimately contributing to Chauvin’s murder conviction.

“We are in a different time,” explains Francesca Dillman Carpentier, a University of North Carolina journalism professor and expert on media impact. The shooting of Renee Good during an immigration protest last Wednesday has unfolded in a dramatically different context.

Unlike the Floyd case, the Trump administration moved quickly to shape public perception of the incident before videos began circulating. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem labeled Good a “domestic terrorist” – a characterization Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey dismissed with an expletive. Both President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance suggested the shooting was justified, claiming Good was attempting to run down ICE agent Jonathan Ross with her vehicle.

“The people who are writing the cultural narrative of the Good shooting took notes from the Floyd killing and are managing this narrative differently,” notes Kelly McBride, a media ethics expert at the Poynter Institute.

What makes this case particularly challenging is the inconclusive nature of the available footage. While multiple videos have emerged from different angles, they’ve failed to definitively resolve the central question: Did Good’s maroon SUV strike Ross before he fired his weapon?

Various news organizations have carefully analyzed the evidence. The Associated Press reported it was unclear if Good’s car made contact with Ross. The Washington Post wrote that videos “do not clearly show whether the agent is struck or how close the front of the vehicle comes to striking him.” The New York Times concluded that after synchronizing multiple clips, “we can see the agent is not being run over.”

“These ICE videos do present irrefutable facts — a woman drove her car and then she was shot dead by an ICE agent,” said Duy Linh Tu, a documentarian and Columbia University journalism professor. “What the videos can’t show is the intent of the woman or the officer. And that’s the tricky part.”

When footage from Ross’s perspective emerged Friday via Minnesota’s Alpha News, it sparked further political division rather than clarity. Vice President Vance shared the video online, stating: “His life was endangered and he fired in self-defense.” Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer countered that “the administration is lying to you.”

This polarized interpretation reflects broader changes in how visual evidence is processed in today’s media environment. Despite – or perhaps because of – the multiple camera angles available, experts suggest the impact will be diminished compared to the Floyd case.

“I don’t know if that adds clarity or more fog to this case,” Tu said. “I think that people will see what they want to see. Or, rather, they’ll pick the angle that aligns with what they already believe.”

The emergence of artificial intelligence has further complicated matters. Before Ross was identified, BBC Verify reported that false images speculating about the masked agent’s appearance were circulating online, along with fake video of Minneapolis demonstrations.

“Now you can’t believe what you’re seeing,” Carpentier explained. “You don’t know if what you’re seeing is the real video or if it has been doctored. I don’t think AI is being a friend in this case at all.”

Legal scholar Angela Onwuachi-Willig, who studied the impact of the Floyd video, found that while it initially prompted many white Americans to experience “an epiphany about racism,” this effect diminished over time. The current rollback of diversity programs under the second Trump administration provides evidence supporting her conclusion that no lasting collective cultural trauma occurred.

As the investigation into Good’s death continues, what remains clear is that in an era of increasing visual documentation, the truth behind such footage has become more elusive than ever.