Answers

1. Editing is everything. At least, that's what Hampe tells us when talking about documentaries. However, I wonder: do mediums exist that do no need any editing?

Everything needs editing, almost. Unless you are a fantastic orator, you will need editing. A novel needs editing, music needs editing, blah blah blah. Hell, I need editing for what I'm saying right here!

2. "The difference is that there is no feedback channel for the audience to test their impressions of the person." Basically, documentaries and many other types of media are one-way. In what different ways do we try to get around this obstacle?

Having write-in votes and competitions for the ends of tv shows, for who dies and who gets kicked off American Idol. Things of that nature. That, and video games, or choose your own adventure DVDs.

3. Hampe talked a lot about editing footage and showed in many ways how footage can be completely turned around depending on how one splices it together. How aware, do you think, are we of this sort of thing? Is our goal when taking in a new work of media to see what the author wanted or to question the "originality" of a work? Exactly how important is it for footage to be "real", and in what context?

I am fairly aware of this, but I highly doubt many others are actually aware about how much they are being manipulated. I think Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart do a good job of making fun of this by making sure that their faces are never seen during their interviews, and they could really be asking any question and just dubbing over what they originally asked. I think it is to see what the author wanted, at first, and then going into the originality, and it is definitely important for footage to be real, without real footage, how are we supposed to know what exactly is happening? Granted, most of the time our footage is edited so it doesn't ,matter.