The brilliance of the White House brawl with FOX. No one paid much attention to their "mistakes" before now and once the station went on the record delineating their News from their Opinion, they were suddenly held to that standard. People who defended them in this battle are going to be forced to back off if they wish to retain any credibility. Well played.

Nah this was just a siren call to the crazed Fox news viewer. I think that Fox meant to get caught on this one. It will highlight a satire book (that would probably been obscure) and hold it up as proof positive of media bias. It is not as if they grabbed the wrong book off the shelf at Amazon since it is only sold through the authors website here:
http://www.orbooks.com/

Fox purposefully copied the cover and pasted in their production department. It is the only way. Hmmmmmm.....

who believes this shit is not intentional, like they don't know the difference between footage shot one day and footage shot a year ago, like there's no discussion between copywriters and video people? same thing with them putting Ds behind names of republicans caught in scandals. not intentional?!? I'm calling BS on that one

Ten Thousand Fox News Anchors could write apologies on ten thousand typewriters for ten thousand years, and still never cover the apologies needed for all of the false information that they've pushed out onto their viewers.

They might end up with "To be or not to be, that is the gazorninplatz", but that's about it.

like they don't know the difference between footage shot one day and footage shot a year ago,

The year ago stuff is in an archive someplace. You have to actively go find it.....locate the specific footage you want to use. The files have dates on them, the files have the names of what the video depicts. It is absolutely, totally, and utterly impossible to claim that this kind of thing happens because of some sort of inadvertent error. It just doesn't work that way.

In the old days this stuff was stored on reels of tape. Today, it's hard drives or other storage media, but if you send someone out to photograph the "crowds" at a Palin book signing yesterday, the footage IS going to include shots of Palin and shots of the crowd.

Why, for any possible reason except total deception, would you NEED to go find some other footage of a crowd? WHERE would footage of a political rally from a year ago be kept that is so proximate to the footage sent into the production room from yesterday's event that it would possibly be plausible that an editor somehow confused the two?

Malice aforethought.....and constantly so.

The presenter doing the apologizing can barely keep herself from laughing as she claims it was not intentional!