What would Adobe metadata in the released cell footage actually tell us?

At most, those fields could indicate that the file passed through Adobe software before it was released. That would make “raw” worth clarifying, but it would not show by itself whether the underlying footage was altered in a meaningful way.

For a stronger check, inspect the metadata in the original downloadable file with a tool that displays XMP fields, then record exactly what the fields say. Metadata is a clue about file handling, not proof of what happened in the video.

I’d be careful with claims about edit history or source clips. A metadata field can describe a project or export, but it doesn’t independently establish that every listed source was used in a particular way, or that the history is complete and reliable.

The key question is what the actual fields mean in context. Someone should separate what can be directly read from the file from any interpretation about why it was processed.

Even if the Adobe metadata checks out, it’s not automatically evidence of a cover-up. Video may be exported or assembled for release for ordinary technical reasons too. The metadata alone can’t settle which explanation applies.

So I’d describe it narrowly: the file may have been processed in editing software. To make a claim about edits to the footage, you’d need more than the metadata.