When a biased article such as the one from J. Fingas about the Rittenhouse trial use of zooming in on a video is published, please mark it as opinion which is not based on all the facts.
It is common knowledge that zooming in on a video can distort what is being seen. A moth flying by the lens can be seen as a flash from a firearm when zoomed in. Though the lawyers may have used the wrong terminology, what they were trying to say was 100% true, yet J. Fingas through lack of knowledge or through being biased reinforced an opinion from a biased publication that the defense attorney was trying to prevent the jury from seeing evidence. The judge correctly sided with the defense since the fact is that zooming in on a video, especially on a device like an iPad, could corrupt the viewed image even if it doesn't corrupt the image source.
It is biased to uphold the opinion when the article writer knows what the actual intent was, or if the writer doesn't know, then it is necessary to learn the facts or not write the article at all.
News of any kind needs to report just the facts without any bias or feeling. Once you include bias and/or feelings it becomes opinion only and not news of any kind.
That article needs to be marked as being the writer's opinion, edited to remove bias and include the fact that zooming in on a video can distort what is being viewed even if it does not alter the source in any way, or deleted since it is not based on ask the facts.