Fox News Accidentally Shows Picture of Tina Fey in Story About Palin
Someone at Fox News has some serious 'splaining to do.
During a Sunday segment about former Alaska governor Sarah Palin's interview with Chris Wallace earlier in the day, a picture of Tina Fey impersonating her nemesis was accidentally placed in the upper-right corner of the screen:
The eagle eyes over at The Right Scoop blew up that picture in the corner to demonstrate that's Fey during one of her "Saturday Night Live" routines:
You'd think the folks at Fox would know what one of their employees looked like.
For those interested, a video clip of this faux pas is available here.
- Noel Sheppard's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
I think I am going to be
Submitted by mostlymoderate on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 1:19am.
I think I am going to be sick. Is FOX news moving further to the left? Seriously, I don't know how this could be a "mistake" and not some intentional action. Considering the fact that Palin has to take so many hits from the rest of the liberal dominated media, this is not amusing at all.
No Way
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 1:40am.
I'd like to think it was a mistake by some intern pulling archival photos from the Palin stock. No way would her employer do something like this to one of their "stars" intentionally. If it was done on purpose, Ailes will have a head roll. Aside from that, it's worth observing that the line between "entertainment" and news coverage is growing blurrier.
Weiner!
Submitted by sergeant stogie on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 1:45am.
With certitude, the photo was hacked!
Weird
Submitted by smitty195 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:02am.
I am scratching my head over this one. Think about it for a moment.....How does a "mistake" like that happen? I'm a Fox News fan, but I am questioning whether or not it was a mistake.
Shep did it...
Submitted by Cowboy on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:52am.
Shep did it...
Letting the interns play with the equipment?
Submitted by Boil It Down on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:23am.
I've noticed TV commercials, TV guides, sound problems and blank screens happen primarily on the weekends. I'd think FOX News would insure this kind of thing be avoided. -bidn-
Weiner
Submitted by bobbys on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:34am.
Weiner Hacked in!
Tina Fey did, after all, make
Submitted by Cowboy on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:50am.
Tina Fey did, after all, make a statement that libs attribute to Palin and quite frequently inaccurately credit to Palin... Only fair she should get some Palin credit...
C'mon Noel.
Submitted by RefudiateObama2012 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 4:11am.
If you're going to give an attribution for this story, you should get it right. The first sentence in the Right Scoop article made it clear who the source is.
Here, take a look at the original story:
http://sheya.com/2011/06/05/fox-news-uses-an-image-of-tina-fey-to-portra...
I think a correction and an apology to Sheya is in order.
Refudiate
Submitted by Noel Sheppard on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 9:03am.
Refudiate,
Actually, you're quite wrong. If you look at Sheya's piece, she wrote, "Here is a large snapshot: (courtesy of TheRightScoop)." She initially just posted the video. He then created the screen grabs which she then added to her piece and hat-tipped him for it. As such, your beef is just potatoes. ns
You're grasping at straws.
Submitted by RefudiateObama2012 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:30am.
You're grasping at straws. Yes The Right Scoop enlarged the image, but it was Sheya who broke the story an hour before TRS ran it. So you're trying to say the person who took the video and did an enlarged screen grab deserves attribution over the original source? I don't think so. Perhaps the attribution should have gone to both. By the way, Sheya is a he, not a she.
Mr. Sheppard should come clean with a press conference.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 6:55pm.
Then reporters can ask as he leaves the stage "Mr. Sheppard, was it fully blown up?"
Dude. The man did link to sheya.com fer heaven's sake. Talk about mountains and molehills.
A spokesman for Fox said that
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 7:14am.
A spokesman for Fox said that he could not say "with certitude" that it was a photo of Tina Fey; he wasn't sure what photos of Tina Fey and/or Governor Palin were out there, that could have been photoshopped or "dropped in"........
And it is going back.. back... back... back...
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 6:56pm.
Home run!
You have got to be kidding me!
Submitted by Rukus on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 8:49am.
Fox let that slip by??? I swear I am going to go 100% net for news! And seeing there is no OT, here is my shameless Shy-style vid of my wonderful daughter...
Galactic SNAPHOOBAR
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 9:11am.
Galactic SNAPHOOBAR
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
To her credit
Submitted by Dave81 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 9:31am.
Tina Fey does full off a good Palin inpersonation. =\
Palin's cringe-worthy moment
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 9:29am.
I caught part of Palin's interview with Wallace when re-aired last evening. It was during the part where she was talking about re-evaluating our role in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya.
Of Afghanistan, she was talkiing about the fact that Karzai wanted us gone, and she said this
Doesn't really want us there, after all we've done for Afghanistan, all the billions we've spent....
no mention of the 1500 lives!!
Talk about a world-class dumbass omission!!
We get it, you don't like
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 9:47am.
We get it, you don't like her. Never saw you complain that any other GOP candidate discussed Afghanistan but didn't mention the casualties.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
So the fact that I haven't
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:49am.
So the fact that I haven't criticized any other GOP for not mentioning the dead means....exactly what?
I haven't heard every comment by every Republican about Afghanistan.
I brought this one up because I happened to catch it and it struck me.
Must I now glue myself to TV and watch everything, and comment on everything?
Yeah, she's the only one.
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 9:53am.
At least she didn't use the worn out "blood and treasure" cliche, which is more crass AFAIC.
I notice that Motherbelt
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:19am.
I notice that Motherbelt failed to mention the 11,000+ wounded in Afghanistan.
What a world-class dumbass omission!
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Wow, Free, that's
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:52am.
Wow, Free, that's effective....defend Palin by deligitimizing my criticism.
I get it, you're a Palin fan.
Whether or not I like Palin means nothing; is it now a rule that only Palin fans can criticize her?
I had actually been impressed with Palin lately, hearing her speak on a variety of subjects. But she blew it on this one, and as far as I'm concerned, to deny it just makes you willing to gloss over any mistake she makes, just because you like her. (turnabout's fair play)
What "motherbelt" mentions or doesn't has no bearing on anything. But when someone with a high profile like Palin talks about what we've "spent" in Afganistan and doesn't mention lives, as far as I'm concerned that's a big mistake.
And if the first thought in my head when she said "billions we spent" was "what about all the lives???" how many other people do you think had the same thought?
I am merely applying your
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:54am.
I am merely applying your "standard" to you and you don't like it.
And I do take issue with Sarah's support of McCain in the 2010 GOP primary. I understand why she did it, but I still don't like it.
Is that all you got?
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
motherbelt, free, chris, etc
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:48am.
What I find interesting here is that mother belt made what she considers to be a vaild criticism of Palin, and the thread took off.
On another thread a poster made a disgusting sexual comment about Palin, and no one said a word. Wow.
I didn't see the "other
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 1:52pm.
I didn't see the "other comment" you refer to. (and you didn't link to it because . . . ?). Meanwhile, this thread took off because some folks did not think the original remark was Valid. Wow.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
In fairness Free
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:00pm.
I think the other comment was deleted by the mods. I missed it too, but saw the aftermath.
I don't think it was left long enough for a chorus of objections. The comments I noticed were mostly posted after its deletion. Wrathful Bru did object, and I think Sick of Libs did as well.
Free, Restless,
Submitted by Radical1979 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:38pm.
Nope the comment wasn't deleted. I envision Sarah on top, a lot. I also think she would make a good President. Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2011/06/05/bob-schieffer-asks...
And it was posted about the same time as the outrage over MB's comment. Not sayin' you can't object to a posting, I just wondered how a truly offensive post was overlooked.
By the way, I didn't link the first time because I found them so offensive.
Rad...Thanks for the heads up about this...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:44pm.
I missed this yesterday, and am glad you called our attention to it. This type of "humor" is disgusting and is beneath NBer's (or should be), and doesn't belong here...Thanks again.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
Right you are Rad
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 3:48pm.
I was thinking of another comment in another thread. Sorry.
I didn't see that one. Nice catch.
Motherbelt,
Submitted by Chris Norman on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:26am.
Apparently, your lack of support of Sarah Palin for president has caused you to now be a villain here. We must remember that NewsBusters is no longer just about liberal media bias but is also now the unofficial "Sarah Palin for President" website, where no criticism of her will be allowed. She is the Republican Party. See, I am now going to be a villain, too. :)
Welcome to the Outcast Club,
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:41am.
Welcome to the Outcast Club, Chris!!
LOL
I don't support Palin for president either
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:55am.
But not because I don't trust her conservative credentials.
I just don't see the benefit of conservatives piling on.
Restless
Submitted by Chris Norman on Tue, 06/07/2011 - 12:40am.
With all due respect, I don't "pile on" Palin. I defend her against unfair and unfounded media attacks when applicable. However, I hate to see what should be a united front against liberal media bias turned into a "you must support everything Palin on everything or else" fight. Motherbelt is generally recognized here as an astute observer of the political scene. She makes some of the best comments on these threads. She posted her objection to the way Palin handled a question and was immediately attacked. If one doesn't agree with her view - fine. However, I can't fail but notice that there are several NB-ers here who hold up support of Palin as some sort of litmus test for what makes a "true conservative" and I, for one, don't like it one bit. The conservative movement did not begin with Sarah Palin,
In light of the context of the interview
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Tue, 06/07/2011 - 7:56am.
I view Motherbelt's objection as rather trivial. One kinda has to be looking for something to object to come up with that one.
She was specifically asked by the host if she thought we should get out because of the monetary cost . In light of that, I found her answer legitimate.
And for the record, I have criticized Palin in the past, especially during the campaign of '08. If I had heard her say "just a couple of mavericks" one more time, I would not have been responsible for my actions. That said, I never came under fire. It's unfounded criticism that is challenged, and on this one, I found the criticism unfounded based on the reasoning above.
I would tend to think that
Submitted by Tom1969ca on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:51am.
I would tend to think that the lives lost in Afghanistan would fall under "after all we've done for Afghanistan..."
So doesn't the "billions
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:54am.
So doesn't the "billions we've spent."
Hi motherbelt.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 7:20pm.
I think you mighta stepped in it just a little. I pulled the transcript here. To be fair, the subject was the cost of the wars. That is why Gov. Palin spoke exclusively about the cost. Look at Wallace's opener.
WALLACE: You also address U.S. foreign policy this week in terms of the budget. You said we should consider a quicker drawdown of forces in Afghanistan. And then you said this, “With Afghanistan, with Iraq, too, and now with Libya, the of the cost of the war, the cost of the war, has got to be considered.”
So, the question is: would you pull some of our U.S. forces out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya because can’t afford to keep them there?
PALIN: Well, I like to talk about each one of those areas specifically, because there are conditions that differ in each area.
Take Afghanistan, conditions certainly have changed even in this last week or two when President Karzai comes out and acts like the host nation to perhaps want us there, or NATO. NATO, as we help lead NATO, we are still concerned about civilians and making sure that civilian casualties are not part of any kind of strategy. And yet, that kind of get thrown back in our face and there — it sounds like a message being sent to America and to NATO today by President Karzai that perhaps we’re not wanted there. After everything that we have done in Afghanistan, after the billions and billions of dollars that we spent there to help rebuild their nation and to squash the terrorist cell so that we’re protected on our own shores. So, conditions have changed there and we need to reevaluate the timeline that we have for ourselves being in there.
Now, I have great faith in Petraeus and he — his folks with boots on the ground and on the front lines, I trust that Petraeus will know of this timeline that makes most sense for America’s interest to be met in Afghanistan.
Now in Libya, conditions there, we have to consider what Congress has passed via this resolution this last week is a good thing. It’s a good message to President Obama. He has not been clear about what our mission is in Libya. And that’s what the resolution is asking.
We are going to be spending billions and billions there, too, with sort of a nebulous, murky mission that’s not really being articulated and that’s not fair to the American public. We need to make sure that we know what we are there for.
And if it’s explained very concisely and very sensibly, then won’t need to be in Libya, which is turning into a civil war there — we don’t need to be –
WALLACE: Just real quickly, back to Afghanistan, I want to move on to some other things. But, really, quickly on Afghanistan, are you saying that the combination of Karzai criticizing and trying to limit our mission and the cost factor, in our U.S. budget, our debt, that we should reconsider our commitment, how long and how and what a footprint we in Afghanistan?
PALIN: We’re putting faith in General Petraeus as he lines out timeline for the American public to understand. Yes, those two factors, Chris, that you mention have got to be considered and reevaluated. “A,” the host nation ability to understand what it is that we are trying to do for them and with them in their nation; and the cost of war.
Three wars that we’re going engaged in today and our country nearing bankruptcy, we have to rethink everything that we’re doing with foreign aid and with foreign intervention. We have got to make sure that it’ America’s interest first being met in each one of these nations. And if there is an opportunity to, say, in Afghanistan with General Petraeus’ guidance, to back out a little bit perhaps sooner than we have because of these conditions that have changed most recently, then I would support that. - SOURCE
Dupe.
Submitted by The Vet on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 7:20pm.
I wuz hacked. Been done weinerized.
The issue is MB's BS
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:41am.
The issue is MB's BS criticism of Palin. Don't change the subject.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Why is the issue MB's
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:46am.
Why is the issue MB's criticism of Palin??? And since when is criticism of Palin BS??
You can defend Palin all you want. I maintain my opinion of what she said.
It was stupid not to mention the lives lost. Push coming to shove, yea, the wounded too.
She could have said "billions of dollars, 1500 lives, and thousands of wounded."
Would you now like to argue about whether she should have mentioned the dead before the money?
Oh, push has to come to shove
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 10:59am.
Oh, push has to come to shove before you care about the wounded?
You are indeed welcome to your own opinion, but BS remarks are still BS remarks.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Free, you are the one who
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:10am.
Free, you are the one who "changed the subject." You decided that the issue was not what Palin said, but my feelings about her, and attacked me on that front, including ridiculing me for supposedly not caring about the wounded.
I voiced my opinion about Palin's comments. You can like it, or you can lump it.
I'm done....I'm not going to continue to respond to this personal attack.
As I said earlier, I am
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:21am.
As I said earlier, I am applying your own standard to you. If in doing so it is a "personal" attack, then thank you for admitting your attack on Palin was "personal".
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Motherbelt - It is not
Submitted by trueconserv on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:36am.
Motherbelt - It is not personal, but you are criticizing Palin for what she didn't say. How trivial can you get?
Damned if she does, and damned if she doesn't.
It was a spot on interview on her part.
p.s. She will always be criticized for things that she NEVER said in the 2008 campaign but the left will use it against her and people will believe it, sadly.
divide and conquer
Submitted by Agnostic on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:18am.
maybe it is the media influence or possibly just the innate differences of left and right but it seems to me that the right is so much more willing to use perceived omissions or slights to attack their own side. In the last few years we have seen SP support life and the military by giving birth and raising a special needs child, supporting her unwed daughter and grandchild, making several visits to the troops and repeatedly reference the military for their abilities and valor. She doesn't spell things out in one comment and those on the right, instead of looking at everything she has stood for over the last several years, attack her for not 'saying the right phrase'. I wouldn't vote for SP given a better choice either but to jump on the liberal attack wagon over any perceived 'omission' or 'misstatement' will weaken the right as a whole.
The failed ideas of the left stay alive for many reasons and the ability to overcome their opposition by protecting their own and causing the competition to eat their own is possibly their second biggest propaganda ploy.
"Divide and conquer"...Well said...
Submitted by PrairieSky on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 2:02pm.
I have noticed this disturbing trend too, and I don't like it. For the record, I like Sarah Palin and have a lot of respect for her, and I would vote for her if she runs. As for a "better choice", as of right now, I'm not sure who that would be. But this trend that I've seen of establishment Repubs being in some instances outright negative and even hostile to Palin, bothers me. I don't expect everyone to support her, or any other candidate or potential candidate, but the dismissive attitude that I've seen exhibited toward her, annoys me. Those of us on the right have enough to contend with in dealing with the continuous antagonism and hostility from the left and its helpers in the MSM, and to see a similar attitude from some of the right toward another Republican(s) is very disconcerting. I am not saying that we can't have differences of opinion on the various candidates and political figures...Of course we can, and I wouldn't want it otherwise. But, to descend into petty disagreements and attacks within our ranks does and will, as you rightly said, "...weaken the right as a whole."
As an example of this, I saw something interesting on Fox this morning...A Repub Party insider, Karen Hanretty, and the liberal commentator, Kirsten Powers, were on discussing Sarah Palin, and if you didn't know who was the Repub and who was the Dem, you would think, by their comments, that Powers was the Repub. Ms. Hanretty was openly dismissive and disrespectful of Palin, and whether or not she supports a Palin run, this type of behavior was totally inappropriate. This is exactly what must no doubt delight the left, to see those of us on the right tearing each other down. We obviously can disagree with each other and choose not to support a particular candidate, but to launch into openly dismissive and disrespectful behavior like what I saw this morning, serves no one except those on the left, and in fact, damages all of us on the right.
"Freedom is never more than one generation away from extinction...It must be fought for, protected, and handed on for them (our children) to do the same." ~President Ronald Reagan
my thoughts on Palin
Submitted by Hoosier Conservative on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:10am.
I don't want to get in the cat fight here - just came to this thread because it's filling up the recent comment box - but I'll offer my thoughts.
Sarah has done a lot to honor our military. She gave one interview where she emphasized the money. That's like complaining Paul Ryan gave one interview where he forgot to mention Medicare.
I will admit that Sarah deserves a little bit of extra protection. While Romney and Gingrich were hiding in the baclground, and when Huckabee was doing interviews with Michelle Obama, Sarah was out there encouraging us to reload. She never gave up. Like her or not she picked up discouraged conservatives in 2009 and helped carry us to election victory. For that she deserves some loyalty in my book.
But that's my opinion and I don't want to fight with someone who disagrees.
Palin's comments
Submitted by trueconserv on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 11:31am.
Motherbelt - I don't think you can criticize Palin's comments. If you look at what she said in context, she's talking about the price we've paid as a country. And that Karzai should be grateful with what we've done!
If you watched the interview as I did, you would have grappled that idea of not just the dollar amount but the WHOLE price that we have paid. Casualties are included with that and most people who watched it know that as a given.
If you criticize a person for tit-for-tat status, then you will never find a candidate that meets your moving goal line.
trueconserv, I have NO
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 12:05pm.
trueconserv, I have NO problem with anyone disagreeing with what I criticized Palin for. I talked about what I saw, and what I thought was a mistake on her part, and anyone can disagree on that point, as you have just done.
FS turned the whole thing into an attack on me, said my criticism of Palin was BS, and made me the subject of the argument. That's a lousy tactic. He went so far as to decree that the "subject is MB's BS criticism of Palin." and instructed people not to stray from that.
That's pretty much attempting to organize a verbal lynch mob, and I don't take kindly to that.
Crybaby (that is an example of a Personal attack)
Submitted by Free Stinker on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 12:35pm.
Trying to organize a lynch mob? Pathetic. You made a BS remark and don't like being called out on it.
Chris tried to say my comments were about no Palin criticism being allowed, which is incorrect. My comments were specifically directed at your petty attempt make Palin look like she has no concern for our troops.
/// Sarah Palin Fan since July 11, 2007 /// خال
Whatever you say, Free.
Submitted by motherbelt on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 12:56pm.
Have a nice day.
Nemesis?
Submitted by Rush to Judgement on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 1:35pm.
More like inspiration! Fey would be Palin's nemesis as Palin is the one being mercilessly mocked.
You say mocked
Submitted by RESTLESS 1 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 6:17pm.
Considering the idiots doing the mocking, I'd say its akin to the constant haranguing of five year olds. Short on facts, long on wind.
The only reason I and countless others have ever heard...
Submitted by jawebster1 on Mon, 06/06/2011 - 5:38pm.
of Tina Fey is because she impersonates Sarah Palin. If Fey had any integrity she would donate half of her salary to Palin's favorite charity. I suspect she won't because she is a Liberal and like most Liberals, she is a selfish ingrate.