I'm downright furious with this channel for the absolute and utter lack of programming related to Black History Month. There are so many great options. You don't even have to be too creative. If nothing else they could run Roots, Tuskegee Airmen, Amistad, Mississippi Burning, Separate But Equal, Dorothy Dandridge, Buffalo Soldiers, there are like a million choices. Come ON people.
many History Channel shows are sadly short on facts to back up what is presented, especially in the more offbeat shows. You couldn't show them in a class because many are either very elementary, if you already know the topic, or lacking key facts.
This made me remember that in high school we had a history teacher that used a lot of these video bits and I remember even then really knowing the difference between, wow I just watched one that really added new information to what we covered in class versus, well that was a lot of fluff and time filler for the teacher.
Or the "expert" presenters are completely dismissed by the academic community as uneducated kooks, and their theories can be easily disproven.
I'm just wondering, is their level of expertise directly proportional to how Bat Shit Crazy they look? I don't run in history expert circles but there have been several times, especially lately, when I saw one of these dudes and heard what sounded like a far fetched theory and thought, they can't be serious, this dude is clearly a crack pot. Its the hair, always the hair that makes me wonder. Does it need to be greasy or big and frizzy or in a riotous pony tail? Is crazy Einstein hair symbolic of genius in the academic community?