Guys/Gals, what is wrong with today's TV history shows and the wrong Gillette info.

[alex2363]

Tonight on History channel's American Restoration TV show, a Barber brought in a towel warmer for restoration, but the show had some wrong info on the advent of the Gillette's razor and its history....he was a bit off, the show stated that during WW1 Gillette gave soldiers the 1st disposable razors in 1905 [ it was disposable blades not razors].

1st of all World War 1 began in 1914 to 1918. 2nd, Gillette never gave the soldiers disposable razors, Gillette contracted out the Brownie razor in the Khaki service set in 1918 to 1920. Wow, what a blunder, not only did they get the WW1 dates wrong they also got the wrong Gillette razor and date. They really need to do some research, maybe they can come on B&B and get the true facts before going on air to 60 million people with inaccurate info.


View attachment 340468 Rick needs to hire some B&B members to do some Gillette research so he doesn't goof up again with wrong facts, and do more history research on WW1 since his show is on the History Channel

 

[SiBurning]

You're preaching to the choir here, brother!

 

[coolbus18]

It must be the fumes they've been inhaling from all those flying saucers and aliens.Sadly it's their little inaccuracies and stretching history(for Inquiring minds) that has just made me not watch their channel. Next they'll show pictographs of de shavers from Machu Piccu that were carved into giant 8 ton slabs of granite and then have that lack luster guy with the haircut by Kitchen Aid Mixers try to make it sound true.. oy!

 

[sgreenstreet]

+1 Yeah, I get sucked in to epidsodes of Pawn Kings and American Pickers that also have a lot of misinformation. They're all by the same people.

 

[Graybeard57]

The misstatement about WWI may actually be a run-on sentence expressing two different thoughts, which could have been fixed with a little attention to detail. Maybe not, however. I do like the show, though. Restoring old, neglected objects to their former glory? What's not to like? Personally, I tune in the History Channel when I want to see what Hitler's up to. So far, it's been all bad stuff.

 

[Haggises]

Tonight on History channel's

American Restoration TV show,

There's the problem right there.
Zero history on the History Channel.

 

[takeshi]

Not surprising. TV and movies are full of blunders. Fanatics notice their pet topics while others generally do not. Consider the source and consider the audience.

 

[MrLara]

That's sad and funny at the same time.

A show on the "History" channel has the wrong history info.

 

[GDCarrington]

The Dragnet series had a disclaimer, "Only the names have been changed to protect the innocent."

The History channel should have a disclaimer as well, "Only the history has been changed to create our revenue."

 

[Haggises]

^^
Very true!

 

[John Von Wuggz]

I am just glad the History channel knew when WWI was. ^ revenue is king.

 

[JaxJim]

The misstatement about WWI may actually be a run-on sentence expressing two different thoughts, which could have been fixed with a little attention to detail.

For whatever it's worth, this was my take as well-- that the error was mostly a clumsily written sentence. I agree, though, that many of these experts play a bit fast and loose with their facts.

 

[Mick]

The channel is only "called" history

the programs are for entertainment purposes only.

As they say "no facts were harmed in the making of this fictional episode"

 

[bassoon_guy]

History Channel doing research? That's almost as crazy as the History Channel talking about history!

 

[dpittman70]

The misstatement about WWI may actually be a run-on sentence expressing two different thoughts, which could have been fixed with a little attention to detail. Maybe not, however.

I was thinking the same thing. Also, I sometimes use the word "razors" when really talking about "blades".

 

[tadas]

Personally, I tune in the History Channel when I want to see what Hitler's up to. So far, it's been all bad stuff.

I have a friend who calls it "The Hitler Channel"

 

[rajagra]

Chalk another one (or two) down to today's sloppy use of language, because "it doesn't matter that much if you follow the rules".
Firstly, some people say "razor" when they mean razor blade. Thet may be accurate in itself, but it's vague, and the problem with the pictured quote is you cannot tell they mean blades.
Secondly, they have lumped two separate facts into one sentence joined by "and". This gives the impression they are concurrent statements, which they are not.

Did Gillette give razors out to soldiers during WWII, or did that start after the end of the war?

I have a friend who calls it "The Hitlery Channel"

FTFY!

 

[alex2363]

The misstatement about WWI may actually be a run-on sentence expressing two different thoughts, which could have been fixed with a little attention to detail. Maybe not, however. I do like the show, though. Restoring old, neglected objects to their former glory? What's not to like? Personally, I tune in the History Channel when I want to see what Hitler's up to. So far, it's been all bad stuff.

I may suspect that it is a grammatical error, but if you run a multi-billion dollar TV station shouldn't you have enough money to hire a competent writing and research team? I know that my teachers wont give me a break if i chose or give the wrong answers.

 

[rajagra]

Sorry, my post turned into a rant.

Spoiler

I may suspect that it is a grammatical error, but if you run a multi-billion dollar TV station shouldn't you have enough money to hire a competent writing and research team?

The BBC used to be a bastion of impartiality and clear communication. But even they have lowered their standards. Their web site now has frequent spelling mistakes, incorrect word use, and poor grammar. Their TV news is heading the same way and often states opinions rather than simply reporting facts. They have no commercial pressures so there's no real excuse for it.

I suppose they have just given in to the informal style of presentation that they think the public wants.

I think it's tragic. Sloppy use of language leads to sloppy logic and supports absurd opinions. The world is becoming more dangerous as a result. People form their opinions and then construct supporting arguments that sound good but have no substance whatsoever.

 

[alex2363]

Sorry, my post turned into a rant.

Spoiler

The BBC used to be a bastion of impartiality and clear communication. But even they have lowered their standards. Their web site now has frequent spelling mistakes, incorrect word use, and poor grammar. Their TV news is heading the same way and often states opinions rather than simply reporting facts. They have no commercial pressures so there's no real excuse for it.

I suppose they have just given in to the informal style of presentation that they think the public wants.

I think it's tragic. Sloppy use of language leads to sloppy logic and supports absurd opinions. The world is becoming more dangerous as a result. People form their opinions and then construct supporting arguments that sound good but have no substance whatsoever.

We are talking about the Gillette and WW1 goof up right?