Another nail in the coffin -- the
http://www.moonlanding.com (or something)
on the image.

That can be legitimately dismissed as not part of the original footage. The viewer may be expected to understand that. It's not too different from seeing the History Channel logo in the lower-right corner of some archive Apollo footage. The History Channel didn't originate the footage, but they want you to know who's responsible for bringing it to you.

The "Live from the surface of the moon" title is clearly intended to be part of the original allegedly shot in 1965. That's what millions of people saw on their television screens while watching the first footsteps on the moon.

Let's not get too spun up -- this is somebody's idea of a prank, and I suspect the joke is going to be on the HB's when they embrace it as 'leaked secrets'.

I agree. Clearly it's a modern invention, and the sheer fun of it is a suitable reason in my book. I quite love elaborate pranks.

How much do you suppose it cost to shoot?

The biggest cost in my estimation would be the construction of the set (ladder, landscape, etc.) and the rental of the space suit costume. The vintage camera is likely something that someone had sitting around. The talent could be convinced to work for free. It's not clear it's being shot in a formal studio -- it could simply be the dark corner of a warehouse. There are several places around my place of employment, for example, that would work. Post-production can be done on software-based systems that are easily obtained.

Because of my connections in the entertainment industry, I could probably produce this video for as cheaply as $500.