Herb
So you are admitting that what he said was true? A mistake explains what he said more than claiming he is slanting it. They had video and facts supporting what he said. They probably meant to use the video that they recorded earlier. Being he stated that “you can see the lines forming” which doesn’t fit that video but does fit the previous video that they had used earlier.

Dan Rather use phony document and had little to back it up while having evidence against it. If he had overwhelming evidence of his accusation and one small piece was discredited, then he wouldn’t have been lying. That wasn’t the case.

No, I'm claiming that "fake but accurate" is no defense.

Yes Steve, it is about the partisanship.

Uhhmm, sorry, but my view is all bias is bad. We probably can't eliminate all of it, but attempting to do so is a good thing, so I think this objection is just silly.

But neither CNN nor MSNBC is even in the same asylum as Fox.

That's a nice way of passing on Nancy Grace and Keith Olberman or even Dan Rather.

But they don't lie openly. They don't invent an alternate reality. Fox does.

Nancy Grace has been busted twice for this. She stated that the Duke lacrosse players were indeed guilty. She also pronounced Richard Ricci guilty in the Elizabeth Smart case and denied taking any responsibility for that. She also lied about her fiance's murder in one of her books.

You've rendered the position: they are all biased and not worth watching into automatically making those who hold such positions batshit crazy Republicans. Good work at poisoning the well.

And I hate to break it to you Michael, but digital maniuplations of pictures is quite common. I'd call that making up their own reality.

Guilty parties:

AP, Reuters, Fox, New York Times, Time Magazine, CBS, National Geographic, Newsweek, USA Today.

Once again how are they slanting the news? Large enthusiastic crowds are showing up at her book signings. Are you claiming they are not or are you simply ignoring that point?

So we are to judge Fox News against perfection instead of the Industry standards?

We are to judge Fox News against their own standards: fair and balanced.

As for "a common human mistake," I think I left open that possibility when I said:

"In this case, if Fox News is not deliberately trying to slant the news, then they're incompetently slanting the news."

In fact, I think you got that idea from me!

I'd also like to notice how Tangoman said Reynolds was "off his meds." Again with the aspersions of mental illness! Play it off, keyboard cat.

Perhaps he has mistaken you for another Michael that posted here. I simply don’t know.

So we are to judge Fox News against perfection instead of the Industry standards? The News industry has been known to make far worst mistakes but that doesn’t matter. The possibility that it was a common human mistake cannot even be considered. How fair is that?

Q what lies would that be? Are you saying that large enthusiastic crowds are not showing up at her book signings?If so then many other News outlets are lying.

You do yourself no good by giving credence to anything that Reynolds writes. The man is clearly off his meds. Your original criticism of his comment is still apt and his "explanation" doesn't explain his psychotic comment.

If he got it into his head that you were Wayne Newton and continually explained to people that his weird comments to you were based on you being Wayne Newton, you'd probably appreciate how far his psychosis has taken over his life.

Propaganda for the good side is essential to combat the deceitful propaganda for the evil the left seeks to do. Nothing less than a full scale assualt [sic] will stop them - beating up on Fox for showing old crowd photos is the political equal to swatting at fleas while the enemy is charging.

What a silly little Manichean world you live in...if you really believe that "the left" is "evil" and "the good side" is made up of conservatives represented by the likes of Fox News...well...I hope you enjoy being on the losing side of history...

By the way, the Fox apologists around here are so cute...keep up the good work! Sadly (for you anyway), you aren't convincing many people, including many of your fellow travelers, as James Joyner makes clear in the original post...

"At 10 o’clock this morning, Martha [MacCallum] reported that the president didn’t watch the election returns and watched the HBO movie [Ed Nortons documentary on Obama],” Garrett explained to FOX anchor Shephard Smith.

“That’s because I misheard Robert Gibbs in the gaggle. The White House says he was probably watching the Bulls-Bucks game. My mistake.”

The list goes on and on and for all you little brown shirts, please stop saluting these mistakes as "innocent".

So you can stuff that "How about applying the same standards and scrutiny to CNN and MSNBC?" nonsense back into the little box of nothing it came from.

Many critical things can be said about CNN and MSNBC, but they are not germane to whether Fox News has a faulty video archive or not.

In this case, if Fox News is not deliberately trying to slant the news, then they're incompetently slanting the news.

Either way, they've got egg on their faces. Pointing fingers elsewhere does not wash it off.

Your second point, it is not unusual even for the nightly news that only has to do it for 30 minutes to hour to get clips mix up or just plain wrong. I suppose you will not admit to seeing an anchor talking about a story and the video being of something totally unrelated. Fox News has what 16 hours a day recording. They use the appropriate footage before and after but let us judge them on a 20 second clip and not the rest.

Let us once look at the facts. Did large crowds show up for Palin’s Book? Yes. Were they enthusiastic? Yes. Are they similar to what she had showing up at her campaign speeches? Yes. Should FOX News use book tour footage? Yes. Would someone get a false expression even if they mistook the campaign footage as book tour footage? No because there were large enthusiastic crowds showing up at both events.

It is like sportscaster stating that the Vikings beat the Packers at their last meeting and showing clips from their first meeting. They would not be lying even though they should have shown a more recent clip. By the way sometimes they show clips of prior games during a game.

As pointed out above they did the same thing with an AP photo during Hillary’s book tour.

Anybody can be sharpshooted or pick apart especially when the audience is so quick to distort and warp the situation. How about applying the same standards and scrutiny to CNN and MSNBC? Yeah I know you not interest in tearing them down or holding them accountable. It is "tear down your enemies even if you have to lie and distort to do it". If the same people had half the passion to destroy our real enemies, the wars would be done by now.

They did use the wrong footage....I guess they must be liberal leaning since they didn’t use the best footage and did only a 20 second spot? Fox derangement syndrome.

Wayne, you confuse me.

First, what's your source that the "best footage" was of her signing?

Second, regardless of whether the original footage would make Palin look better or worse, why can't Fox News get their footage straight? My personal video archives aren't in that much disarray and I'm not even a news network.

Third, how does Fox News mistakenly airing the wrong footage (for the second time) lead to me being deranged? Their screw-up is my symptom? How does that work exactly?

(PS, I propose a moratorium on all phrases that end in "Derangment Syndrome." It was funny, once upon a time, to assume that disagreements stem from derangement, but the LOLcatz played that meme off some time ago.)