Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Guest
|
Quote Reply
Topic: How reliable is the History Channel? Posted: 25-Aug-2007 at 03:39 |
It depends. I'll confess I enjoy it a lot. However sometimes the research could be a lot better. For instance whenever they bring upm Victor Davis Hanson on anything to do with the Persian Wars, then I want to throw things at the TV. However their special on Carthage was excellent. As on the birth of Islam.
At the end of the day you have to remember they are another TV Channel and they have to make money, and need as large an audience as possible.
|
|
Aelfgifu
Caliph
Joined: 25-Jun-2006
Location: Netherlands
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3387
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Aug-2007 at 03:16 |
We do not have the history channel here, but we do have Discovery and National Geographic Channel, and they too have some history programmes, which I suppose are close in level and quality as the History Channel.
In my experience, what they tend to do is to take a subject, and then take the easiest/most obvious/most interesting sounding explanation for it, and bring this as the absolute thruth. So they are in general not very wrong (although I have heard some pretty amazing f-ups... Like emperor Augustus being called so because he conquered Egypt in that month....! ), but they are increadibly singe minded. No discussion or debates are taken into account, no alternative theories, no changes of perspective. And in a branch of study like history, taking account of different theories is vital!
Another thing is the circular reasoning that is all to common. I saw a doc on Stonehenge, and after an hour of mediocre scholarship, the conclusion was that the people who build it were not primitive at all..... Well yeah, duh! They built the damn thing, didn't they? Does that in itself not prove they were not that primitive? That is pretty much the basis you started out from, and now it is also the conclusion! Come on! Do they think I am stupid or what?
|
Women hold their councils of war in kitchens: the knives are there, and the cups of coffee, and the towels to dry the tears.
|
|
kasper
Pretorian
Joined: 22-Feb-2007
Location: Bouvet Island
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 187
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Aug-2007 at 00:22 |
I usually find that History International has much better programming than the History Channel. But that isn't saying much.
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Aug-2007 at 00:19 |
The thing I don't like about the history channel is their inability to present their information sequentially, in an order that furthers discussion of the underlying topic of investigation. They will in one particular episode go from one topic, to another, to another, in no particular order and in a way which does not evidence a particular argument.
Just like writing a real research report, they need to present their information sequentially and in a way that related back to the original topic of investigation.
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 25-Aug-2007 at 00:09 |
Thank you Justinian, Penelope's view was much better written than mine. I like to see the critical view, rather than stay totally accepting. Skepticism is medicine for those who like to question everything. I had a friend who used to take me to evenings where they played the hardest of hard core Christian fundamentalist videos that you would never get to see on history TV. I liked them because they they were built on narrow but well thought out perspectives and showed points I had never questioned before.
|
elenos
|
|
Justinian
Chieftain
King of Númenor
Joined: 11-Nov-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1399
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Aug-2007 at 22:05 |
^^^ Very accurate assessment. I would say the history channel, when it is actually showing something on history, is good for basic information. If you want to learn about something in detail you should look elsewhere.
Edit: I was referring to Elenos' statement but it applies to penelope's as well.
Edited by Justinian - 24-Aug-2007 at 22:07
|
"War is a cowardly escape from the problems of peace."--Thomas Mann
|
|
Penelope
Chieftain
Alia Atreides
Joined: 26-Aug-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1042
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Aug-2007 at 22:05 |
The channel sometimes showcases interesting programs, most of which only contain skepticism other than actual facts. But that isnt necessarily bad, it just encourages me to learn more on my own. The same goes for other channels.
Edited by Penelope - 24-Aug-2007 at 22:07
|
|
elenos
Chieftain
Joined: 13-Jun-2007
Location: Australia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1457
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Aug-2007 at 21:37 |
When the programs are good they are very good and when bad they are awful!
Edited by elenos - 24-Aug-2007 at 21:39
|
elenos
|
|
what_is_history
Janissary
Joined: 23-Aug-2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Aug-2007 at 18:31 |
This is a good question. I had a professor who called it, "The Popular Culture Channel." I think it depends on the program. Usually they just show a bunch of crap called "Modern Marvels" or "Ice Road Truckers." I actually don't like the History Channel all that much to be honest.
|
"It aint what you don't know that gets you in trouble; it's what you know for sure that just ain't so."
-Mark Twain
|
|
Malik
Janissary
Joined: 14-Sep-2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 28
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 24-Aug-2007 at 17:44 |
Ive heard people mentioning that alot of the stuff on HC is unreliable and inaccurate.How many of you feel the same way?DO any of you watch the HC?
|
|