Discovery channel.....historic events

to you all who have a much deeper understanding than me about history,
would you recommend the programs on that channel to be entirely accurate and fair or biased at times??

i stopped schooling quite early to go onto professional career but always was fascinated with history,so i do Wikiped a lot and when i get a chance,i always look out for the DC (i like how my brains can relax a bit as 2 history programmings are spliced with some good old myth buster or American chopper too :smiley: :bravo: :bravo: )

one example i had yesterday was on a reconstruction of the events leading to Hiroshima.
the actors re-enacted events shows that the pilot of the Enola gay sticks his head out the cockpit window and wave as you would do when asking someone to move sideways,as well as shouting “get out the way,move over!”

then on the real footage of that day,you clearly see the pilot waving like a star and smiling ,obviously delighted with his new found stardom…

to many this wouldn’t be a big deal, but i find it unfortunate that a channel like DC would be making facts appear different than they truly are

no-one is watching then??

I mostly watch history channel for that sort of thing. As a general rule of history/documentary type shows, the less dramatic the advertising, the more accurate the show is.

I would be very wary of any historical documentary that uses anything more than a few frames, evenly spaced out, of re-enactment footage. While some serious collectors/re-enactors can bring some sense of visual authenticity (with regards to picturing weapons, vehicles, equipment, uniforms, insignia, etc.), the modern trend towards “action” style visual representation leaves much to be desired.
It’s a pretty sad state of affairs when modern historical documentary makers resort to the style used by filmakers such as Kubrik & Spielberg when they want to “re-create” a documentary “feel” for one of their scenes. There is plenty of old stock footage out there, yet this does not calibrate well with what is essentially the dumbing down of history to adjust to the perpetual intellectual decay of North American audiences.
Candied fluff for the mobs of mediocrity.

I watched ‘The History of Britain’ whilst in the UK recently; that was great. Presented by Simon Schama who is a fairly well respected historian, I believe. Of course it’s about Britain, which may not be to your interest.

any history is interesting to me BC.

i’ve just finished the history of singapore,it’s just amazing…

then the question in my mind was,why did singapore achieve it while philippines didn’t…
the answer is,singapore was built on models by the british empire,while philippines has do do with spanish/american models

Just curious, what are you referring to here?

Public order? Societal structuring?

I think I understand, vaguely what you mean, but just not sure.

[quote=“TainanCowboy”]DBF -
Just curious, what are you referring to here?

Public order? Societal structuring?

I think I understand, vaguely what you mean, but just not sure.[/quote]

i was vague…
because i meant “achieve it all”

there are many factors that meant singapore is a success story while the philippines probably won’t ever be,but this program and the feedback i got since i’ve got to know philippines better is that past influences were never all that great.