How reliable is the History Channel?

Anything on HC dealing with Christianity is usually couched from a critical and skeptical approach.  Avoid such shows if you want the truth.  P

The "truth" about Christianity is dealt with on Christian channels 24/7, or is it? but well put Aelfgifu!

Originally posted by Prophet Are you accusing me of being some kind of homophobe?

     I really don't know if you are or not, but the fact that no one mentioned homophobes or homosexuality and you are being defensive about it will certainly give the impression that you are indeed a homophobe.

I rather liked the wonderful word thruth and got the thrust of it all! But seriously Prophet what are you talking about? All of a sudden we have another word homophobe and without knowing what caused your sudden outburst. Do you mean a lover of men or lover of mankind? The latter is quite in order when talking about Christianity but the former belongs on another thread. You will find those on this board do have a wide understanding, but make sure what you talk about right now has to do with the subject!

Originally posted by what_is_history "Ice Road Truckers."

You shouldn't really mock "Ice Road Truckers". Along with "Dogfights" its been one of the biggest documentary hits this year. Its enormously popular- the figures are staggering.

Originally posted by King John I think what some of you are missing is that most of these "documentaries"/programs are not actually made by the History Channel they are simply bought from smaller production companies. Simply put these programs are not made by historians but rather amatuers and hobbyists whose schooling does not include historical research (I know because I went to undergrad to do just that, I quickly changed my mind as to what I want to do). On top of that there are time constraints that require editing and cutting of certain information. Then you have the shows like Wild West Tech or Mail Call both of which nobody should be watching anyway. When it comes to TV I stay to PBS, National Geographic, Discovery, and the Food Network.

Well usually the historical basis of these films rests with three things:
1. Any expert brought in.
2. Any prior books, magazines or media that can be found.
3. Researchers- who usually aren't experts.
Documentaries usually try and provide a balanced view from the sources available, modified of course by the opinions of the various people involved. Almost all historical programs are made by "amateurs". That said one has to be particuarly careful about the main force behind a program. Good examples being all that Alex Jones schlock which despite its constant repetition of historical "examples" manages to misrepresent or get wrong the vast majority. Similarly John Pilger's recent "War on Democracy" refused to back up claims, provided no context, was entirely one sided and pandered to Pilgers own preconceptions.

Main role of History today is:Divide et impera!It had divided people easy could be ruled.It is my opinion.

THC is poorly written, poorly researched and a revisonist haven. It's directors and producers are liberal, leftists socialists who overtly promote that political ideaology.

I don't know about anywhere else, but in this area we now have H2, or History Channel 2.  H2 is the Alien Channel, the regular History Channel is now the Doomsday channel.  They moved all of the Hitler stuff to the Military Channel.  If you look a little you'll find that the History channels and the Discovery channels, along with the Military channel, are all owned by the same outfit.

Ever kind you are Tj...elementary? I grant you your opinion but it ain't even that when distortion and revisionism, which their corporate owners and sponsors and production department flaunts regularly, as their ideologies. Better bet..... PBS. And then only marginally.

Originally posted by Malik 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?

I watch it, and it's companion H2 and The Military Channel.  Generally speaking, their historical accuracy is awful.  The events referred to seem to be fairly accurate, as is a good deal of the narrated information,  but the visual material presented to support it to the audience is very often wrong, erroneous, contradictory or all of the above.  Same for many of their "eyewitnesses" or "survivors", most famously the old geezer who had allegedly served in the infantry, the artillery and the Royal Air Corps during WWI. 

I watch it because I like History...and because it's the only game in town.