[Epapazian]

I happen to be in the media business, so I understand that the only way for the History or Military Channels to turn a profit is by buying super cheap programming and rerunning each installment hundreds of times. Still, I am amazed at the sloppy work of many of the documentary producers these channels rely on. For example, a review of the Battle of the Bulge starts off by telling us that Hitler stealthily assembled 175 divisions ( or some number of this magnitude) for his December 1944 assault.Huh? If that had happened we would have been driven into the English Channel. The visual support used in these programs is even less accurate. A piece on B-24 bombers treats us to footage of B-25s instead ( true, both planes had twin tails ); an episode about Germany's Tiger tanks shows us footage of Mark IV Panzers; a review of the ill-fated Dieppe raid shows the German's counterattacking with French light tanks, and so it goes. The underlying assumption of the cheapo documentary makers is that no one will notice. I think that they are wrong and such sloppy work reflects badly on the channels that air such programs. What do you guys think?

[1250ships]

Agree completely. There are only a few programs I can bear to watch on the History Channel. Over the years there have been a few gems but most of the shows are dreck. Sometimes I watch more for the footage and just ignore what the brainless narrator is saying.

Ironically if they would preview these shows to a few amateur experts they would get a ton of fact checking for free. Most of us would happily sit through an episode of Dogfights and take notes on what should be changed. Heck- even seeing the script would allow improvement before they went to production.

You know you are in trouble when your accuracy is worse than Wikipedia.....

[STARMAN 352ND]

I agree some of the programs are not worth watching .
I think some of these guys need to take a course in WWII History and get the facts before they make a documentary..
Otherwise i'll be sitting there counting all the mistakes they did on the show.
JP

[Black 6]

Originally Posted by 1250ships

You know you are in trouble when your accuracy is worse than Wikipedia.....

That says it all 1250. I hate getting into a program only to find it filled with sloppy editing of stock footage (wrong vehicles shown, etc). That really robs any enjoyment of the program from me as I'll then concentrate more on the flaws than on what the program was about to begin with. One of the worst examples I can cite was a short series on the Military Channel of gun camera footage. The host or narrator would give incorrect facts about the planes and footage wouldn't always match. I'm no expert, but when they say a plane is armed with four machine guns and then show a graphic of the plane that has eight, even I can tell the difference.

[SKUNKY]

It totally chaps me off too...I want to see a return to "necessary error" only programming...

[skysurfer808]

I think they need to hire me as a fact checker.

Seriously though, I've noticed that most mass media outlets really don't seem to care about accuracy. I harp on it on this forum when it comes to aircraft inaccuracies and this is a group that tends to care about such things. Still, the "powers that be" seem to only think that the general public is a mass of brain dead couch potatos who don't care about whether something is accurate or not. This holds true even for the History Channel, whose documentaries often over simplify things in their presentations. Looking at even the Dogfighting show, which is a favorite...there are errors that really ought not to be permitted...especially when done CGI...just look at the markings of the Vejtasa Dauntless and tell me if they got it right in the show....compared to HobbyMaster's model. I'm for accuracy if only because it better serves the memory of those who served, and because as a budding historian, it makes more sense to present truths than to accept myths. When myths are accepted as truths, the result is not only a distorsion of history...but also a chance to make the mistakes true history is supposed to allow us to avoid. Too often though, military themed programming has its own agenda, as the firms that underwrite such programs through commercials seek to influence public opinion in favor of their products (look at how many recruiting and defense contractor adds there are during these shows.).

Skysurfer808

[flyXwire]

It ticks me off too! I guess this is one way for the mainstream media to perpetuate the 'dumbing down of America'. They just couldn't care less anymore, I suppose!

[chiefs70]

Well, it seems if it has anything to do with history it is automatically sloughed off as irrelevant. It is too bad people don't see the value in history and learn the basics. Not only would it free those of us who care from having to listen to the constant errors by self-appointed "experts" it would help some of the folks who make decisions exhibit a better understanding of trending.

Now then, back to Ancient Discoveries. I don't know anything about ancient Chinese weaponry so I am probably ripe for the picking.

[Shawn 507]

I hate it too, but I must admit that it would be difficult at best to find the right film for the story. I'm on fairly decent terms with Steve Zaloga, military historian and model building god. And even he admits that you would have to dig and dig in the archives to find just the right stuff. He also admits to finding gems in places and under listing you'd never think to look at.
So while there surely is the proper footage, the folks who filed that stuff away in the archives really weren't too concerned with getting the correct film in with the particular file. Film of tanks entering Germany may be in a file on engineer operations, because that is what they were actually there to film.
Also, most of the Hitler Channels shows are really made for those without any real interest in the subject. So while the show is about the Battle of the Bulge, showing Panzer IIs from the Invasion of France wont excite or be noticed by most.
It would take a lifetime of lifetimes to get the archives sorted out for the hobbyist or those interested in certian aspects of war captured on film. But what really pisses me off is how they will continue the BS stereotypes of certian AFVs and Aircraft. The worst shows are the Military Channel's top 10 whatever. The rating schemes and choices really are generated more by hype than reality. The AK-47 as the worlds best service rifle, oh I think not.
- Shawn

[1250ships]

Perhaps we need a thread listing the shows that are worth watching.