So, that was actually very interesting considering the source and the topic. Very interesting.
I would say that it’s a re-edit done by the company for some reason, I’m guessing political reasons. What’s curious though is that there simply appears to be more ambient sound in the “first” version compared to the second.
When I look at the spectra of them using iZotope’s RX software I can see as well as hear that there are background sounds that are present in both versions. So the question is what the sources are of the first version’s additional background ambience. In other words it’s clear that the dialog was edited and that there were two sources of ambience. My guess is that the first version got more ambience to make it more dramatic, in other words part of the background didn’t originate with the footage but is from some other place and/or time.
As for what software could have done it the answer is any decent editing software, from Pro Tools to Cubase/Nuendo to DP to Logic etc, or video editing software. What software did the job? Probably Avid Media Composer, Adobe Premiere or Final Cut X, essentially whatever the people working in that company normally uses.
PS: I don’t think we’ll see too much Vocaloid-type software for this type of use though, seeing that editing a source is less bad (but still bad) than straight up fabricating what the source said. So more “reputable” (clearly questionable) outlets won’t do it, but I wouldn’t shady ones probably will.