No, the author of the video is doing no such thing. The article author was adding unnecessary spin. The video author was pointing out that many "action" shots are posed (not necessarily by the photographer). Because there are photographers there the individuals involved put on a show, even when not much was going on. The video author/photographer's point was that photographers in many conflict areas sometimes are in the middle of legitimate moments of high drama, but often there is also low drama staged for their benefit. The mere presence of a cadre of professional-looking photographers causes the observed to undertake a behavioral change which can, in many cases, result in photos that look like they (the photographed) are engaged in some confrontational situation, when really they are just waiting around and chest thumping, hoping for something to happen. Thus, unsuccessful riots by a very few individuals result in stunning pictures that suggest much more in the minds of readers and viewers. The photographers and rioters both must have something to do in the down time between the moments of high drama, I suppose.
Further, he states in the video quite clearly that he wants people to realize that these photographs are taken by people with agendas, participating in a process, taking pictures of people with agendas, and that sometimes those agendas come together in ways that create images of action and conflict which don't really exist in that moment and in that time, and the public need to be aware that photographers influence situations by their presence and that things occur off-frame; that photo framing may radically alter a photo's context thus altering the images as conveyed.
In the photo journalism industry this is not news, but for the public who often take images at face value this rare glimpse of things can offer quite a disconnect. It can be shocking to be reminded to view things with an overly critical eye, and I think the photo journalism industry would have to tighten things up a bit if the public at large paid more attention to and was, on the whole, more critical of these kinds of issues.