Which news organizations have published raw bystander videos from the Alex Pretti shooting and where are those hosted?
Executive summary
Multiple national and international news organizations have published or embedded raw bystander videos of the Alex Pretti shooting on their platforms — including BBC, The Guardian, The New York Times, CNBC, Reuters, ABC (abc.net.au), The Washington Post, NewsNation and several tabloid and local outlets — and those clips are hosted on the outlets’ own video pages or article pages where the footage is presented and in some cases verified for viewers [1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9].
1. Which organizations published the raw bystander video footage
Broadcasters and digital-first outlets widely circulated bystander recordings: the BBC ran a video segment containing eyewitness footage on its video page [1], The Guardian posted multiple bystander clips in video-format pieces documenting the shooting [2] [10], The New York Times produced an interactive timeline and a standalone video that includes on-the-ground footage [11] [3], CNBC reported verified bystander videos and embedded them in its reporting [4], Reuters explicitly referenced and reviewed bystander videos in its coverage [5], and ABC’s Australian service published aggregated bystander video coverage online [6]. U.S. outlets including The Washington Post and NewsNation also published or reviewed raw clips as part of investigative and breaking-news articles [7] [8]. Tabloid and entertainment sites such as TMZ carried footage and related video coverage as well [9].
2. Where those videos are hosted (on-platform locations)
The footage cited in reporting has been hosted on the publishers’ own video or article pages: the BBC’s eyewitness footage appears on bbc.com’s video page for the story [1], The Guardian’s clips are on theguardian.com in video-format articles [2] [10], The New York Times embeds its eyewitness video on nytimes.com in both its interactive timeline and a video article [11] [3], CNBC published verified bystander clips on its site alongside explanatory reporting [4], Reuters and The Washington Post included footage or described frame-by-frame reviews on their story pages [5] [7], and ABC’s coverage is carried on abc.net.au with embedded video [6]. NewsNation’s reporting notes it reviewed bystander videos and published analysis on its site [8], and TMZ posted on-scene video on its own web article [9]. Where outlets say they “verified” footage, that verification and the clips are presented on the outlet’s platform [4] [5].
3. How outlets differentiated raw clips from verified analysis
Several organizations clearly separated raw eyewitness clips from journalist-led verification: CNBC and Reuters reported that they had reviewed and verified multiple bystander angles before drawing conclusions or noting contradictions with official narratives [4] [5], while The New York Times published an interactive timeline pairing raw clips with frame-by-frame description [11]. The Guardian and the BBC posted unedited eyewitness video alongside reporter context [2] [1]. NewsNation and tabloids like TMZ characterized what their reviewed clips showed but differed in tone and depth of verification — NewsNation reported no bystander video it reviewed showed a visible weapon [8], whereas TMZ focused on immediate footage and crowd confrontation [9]. Wikipedia’s current summary also notes that Reuters and The Wall Street Journal reviewed bystander video evidence, although Wikipedia itself aggregates rather than hosts primary footage [12].
4. Limitations, framing and outstanding questions
Reporting is consistent that multiple outlets posted or embedded bystander video on their own platforms, but available sources do not provide a definitive catalog of every raw clip circulating on social platforms or every third-party host; several outlets emphasize that their journalists verified angles and timing against official statements while others primarily published the unaltered footage for public viewing [4] [5] [1]. Where government officials have advanced a different account, major news organizations published the bystander videos on-site and used them to test competing narratives — a fact that has driven legal and political responses in Minneapolis and prompted calls for preservation of evidence [5]. The body of reporting reviewed here makes clear which legacy outlets hosted and analyzed the clips on their pages, but does not enumerate every social-media repost or aggregation by independent creators.