New History Channel Program

[John Curnutte]

 I've enjoyed it so far , and the film is not to shabby . They do skip around alot but the thing that gets me is the Austrian guy who came to the U.S. and goes to the attack in Alaska at Attu Island . His story is a grabber wish there was more there .
                         Nutte

[gyrene81]

So far after 3 episodes....boooooorrrrrriiii nnnnngggg...all U.S. propaganda the same way it was portrayed in WWII newsreels. Looks like they took a lot of clips from the previously mentioned World at War series, colorized them and then dropped them where they thought would be appropriate.

  boring.

[Shuffler]

Made by Americans for Americans.

Odd how many non-Americans post just because they live here. Love it or leave it.

[Die Hard]

Made by Americans for Americans.

Are you saying Americans need to have biased programming? Ego stroking? Can't we all just handle the truth?

[soda72]

All you need to do is watch a few BBC WW2 documentaries and reallize Ego stroking dosen't stop at the borders...

 

[Shuffler]

Are you saying Americans need to have biased programming? Ego stroking? Can't we all just handle the truth?

Why don't you go visit the graves of all our servicemen overseas. See if you feel any different.

We have no reason to apologise to any other country. We should however quit sending them handouts.

[KgB]

I've never seen the history channel claim the USA won ww2.  The primary demographic for the program is the USA, so it would stand to reason the producers would gear programs with the historic perspective of the USA in mind.   That isn't propaganda, that is a free market economy with the intent of drawing likely viewers.

It is true however that the US did save the day in ww2, sorry if that offends your sensibilities.  It was the vast industrial capability of the USA that brought so much to bear against the axis that turned the tide.  At the time there were many in America who viewed the war in Europe as none of america's business.  Thankfully for all of us that sentiment did not prevail.

I know it is a hard pill to swallow for many that American hegemony has been and is so influential on the world stage.  Leading in areas such as medicine, science, humanities, literature and technology.  No need to hate us for it or be jealous about it, we'd prefer it if you just said thank you and went on your way.

Wow. Both of you have a lot in common.

[DREDger]

Are you saying Americans need to have biased programming? Ego stroking? Can't we all just handle the truth?

What is it that you mean by 'truth'?  The audience for this program are Americans, it makes sense that the narratives and perspective are told from the viewpoint of American history.

I am curious to know what you think should be different?  Are you suggesting that the historical accounts are inaccurate?  Or that the camera footage is a fabrication?

Silliness.

[john9001]

i don't understand why america invaded france in WW2, france was not even at war with america.

[DREDger]

So far after 3 episodes....boooooorrrrrriiii nnnnngggg...all U.S. propaganda the same way it was portrayed in WWII newsreels. Looks like they took a lot of clips from the previously mentioned World at War series, colorized them and then dropped them where they thought would be appropriate.

  boring.

I have to admit I've found the program moderately entertaining.  I think most of the good action shots of the period have been shown or seen before.  I even noticed a few clips were shown more than once, representing two distinctly different events.

Calling it 'propaganda' is a stretch....more a leap off the grand canyon but hey, you're entitled to your opinion.  I'm not sure how you would have eyewitness accounts and narration done differently to not meet your definition of being propaganda.  

What would you suggest be done different?

[DREDger]

i don't understand why america invaded france in WW2, france was not even at war with america.

 

[Shuffler]

i don't understand why america invaded france in WW2, france was not even at war with america.

 

[Die Hard]

What is it that you mean by 'truth'?  The audience for this program are Americans, it makes sense that the narratives and perspective are told from the viewpoint of American history.

I am curious to know what you think should be different?  Are you suggesting that the historical accounts are inaccurate?  Or that the camera footage is a fabrication?

Silliness.

The remake of Pearl Harbor was typically "by Americans for Americans", I thought it was just embarrassing. U-571 too, but at least Hollywood doesn't proclaim historical accuracy like the History or Discovery channels do. Sometime the bias is almost too obvious, like that "Top 10 fighters" show; P-51 won with the Spit coming second. The 109 got an honorable mention at number 7... the 262 wasn't mentioned with one word. And that whispering idiot hosting "Future Weapons" is nothing more than a sales rep for American and Israeli defense industries. Don't get me started on "Dogfights"...

[Plazus]

The remake of Pearl Harbor was typically "by Americans for Americans", I thought it was just embarrassing. U-571 too, but at least Hollywood doesn't proclaim historical accuracy like the History or Discovery channels do. Sometime the bias is almost too obvious, like that "Top 10 fighters" show; P-51 won with the Spit coming second. The 109 got an honorable mention at number 7... the 262 wasn't mentioned with one word. And that whispering idiot hosting "Future Weapons" is nothing more than a sales rep for American and Israeli defense industries. Don't get me started on "Dogfights"...

Those film producers are from the United States. It is to be expected.

[Die Hard]

All you need to do is watch a few BBC WW2 documentaries and reallize Ego stroking dosen't stop at the borders...

 

Top Gear being an excellent example of that. I guess people all over the world likes to be pandered to and told they are the best in the world.