Ben Godar drew sweeping generalizations about The History Channel’s ratings-grabbing obsession with violence and gore. These generalizations were based upon a SINGLE night of viewing. Perhaps the night of Charlie Manson, Hitler and Genghis Khan was thematic programming.

He asserts that The History Channel is perverse in showing documentaries about Hitler and W.W. II. Yes, there is much more to 20th-century history than Nazis, but the importance of the second world war is undeniable. It is NOT surprising that so much time is devoted to it. It was the pivotal event of this century.

Godar claims university students already know as much about W.W. II as they need to know. This is a dubious assertion. Many, if not most students, DO NOT know much about W.W. II or its consequences.

Godar makes unsupportable historical claims. He claims the plight of the worker is the same today as it was nearly a century ago. Can this be supported by the evidence?

Doubtful, since so much has changed since the 1890s.

Godar argues that students don’t know much about important historical issues such as the civil rights movement, the plight of Native Americans and the suffering of migrant workers. Upon what basis does he argue that students DO NOT know about these topics?

And why are these specific topics more important than others?

All in all, Mr. Godar’s critique of The History Channel needs a little more historical method to support its claims. Perhaps another class in history would help? And when all else fails, turn off the TV and read a book.

Robinson M. Yost

Alumnus

Ames