Earlier this week my mom and I were driving back from Houston after a baseball tournament I had played in. Somewhere along the way we passed a group of protesters holding signs criticizing ICE. That reminded my mom of a video someone had recently sent her, so she pulled it up on her phone and showed it to me while we talked about it.
The video featured a former ICE official speaking very passionately about problems he said he witnessed inside the agency. His name is Ryan Schwank, and he previously worked with ICE as an attorney and training instructor. When someone has actually worked inside a system like that, people naturally pay attention. His background makes his words feel serious and credible.
To be honest and fair, I don’t know whether Mr. Schwank is completely right, partly right, or mistaken about some of the things he claims. Government officials have disputed parts of his claims, and the public still doesn’t have every piece of evidence. That means the honest answer right now is that we don’t fully know. But this experience taught me something important: a viral clip is not the same thing as the full truth.
But as we watched the clip together, my mom pointed something important out to me: the way the video was circulating online made it sound like he was testifying under oath, when in reality he was speaking at a public forum hosted by political groups critical of ICE. That distinction matters. I’ve learned that testifying under oath in a formal hearing carries legal consequences for false statements. Speaking at a public forum or event does not carry the same legal standard.
That doesn’t mean Schwank is automatically wrong. But it also means that viewers should be careful not to assume the situation is more settled than it really is.
What made the video powerful is that Schwank’s story included real things: his experience working for the agency, his role helping train officers, and his personal concerns about what he says he saw and was asked to do. But that’s exactly why messages like this can be so persuasive.
My mother reminded me that when people want to persuade others, they often include real facts and experiences alongside strong claims. That combination can make a message feel more certain than the evidence can sometimes actually prove. Most people don’t believe obvious lies. The most convincing stories often mix real facts with strong emotions and dramatic conclusions. That combination can make a message feel more certain than the actual evidence might support.
In today’s world, people see short videos everywhere on social media, in group chats, and online news feeds. Those clips are designed to grab attention. But real understanding usually requires slowing down, asking questions, and looking at more than just one video.
The smartest response is not to automatically believe everything you hear, but also not to dismiss everything either. It’s to ask better questions.
Who is speaking? What is their background or experience? Who is asking the questions? Who edited the video, and how might they be trying to shape what I think? What evidence actually supports the claims being made? And just as important, what information might be missing from the story?
That kind of thinking is called discernment, and in a world full of viral clips and strong opinions, it might be one of the most important skills my generation can learn.
If you want to submit an article to this column, please follow the attached document.
Email [email protected] with any questions. Future_Voices_Contributor_Guide_2025.
About Future Voices
Future Voices is a Sunday-morning column in The Dallas Express in which young Texans share how faith and perseverance shape their lives. These stories remind readers that God often speaks through the honesty and courage of the next generation.
