Killing Lincoln by Bill O'Reilly

[Gencor]

(04-25-2017 10:54 AM)L Verge Wrote:  What a great lesson plan, Jamie! Too bad we can't clone you and send this style of teaching into classrooms across the nation. Members of my staff and I work with National History Day students, and one of the most difficult lessons to teach both the students and their teachers is how to use primary sources and citations. Years ago, I actually participated in a museum workshop where we conducted classes on this for just teachers (most of whom were very weak in that area).

Way back when Killing Lincoln first came out, I tried to find out more about O'Reilly's "co-author" because I suspected that he might be the real historian. Not so. Martin Dugard left the corporate world of marketing to pursue journalism - mainly writing articles for sports magazines. I'm not sure how he and O'Reilly hooked up, but I still suspect that Dugard did the bulk of the writing.

My respect for National Geographic dropped when they produced the film. I understand that they still have plans for doing his Killing Patton script, and Macmillan's Henry Holt and Co. division still has him under contract for more of his "Killing" series (who's left?). Here are some statistics that I found that will make you groan: Henry Holt and Company says that that series has sold 9.5 million copies to date. National Geographic says that 3.4 million viewers watched the Lincoln movie - surpassed only by the Killing Kennedy one.

Of course, Nat Geo is owned by Fox, so it will be interesting to see whether the fall-out of advertisers due to O'Reilly's alleged indiscretions and his firing will hurt that subsidiary also. I'm betting that sales will increase. I also feel that the lack of good history teachers on a national level, as well as the elimination of history classes in many areas, have led to this acceptance of weak/bad history because the average reader does not know any better.

The more I read your comments, Laurie, the more I know that you and I think a lot alike. I keep saying that there are not enough good history teachers but more, there doesn't seem to be enough interest in the school curriculum to place more emphasis on American History. I believe that there would be more accuracy if there was more of a demand for it. I shudder to think what people think that they are learning by reading these pieces of published inaccurate materials. A lot of people believe that just because this stuff gets published, that is all true. Most don't even bother to look it up or question it, because they don't know to ask the questions.

---

(04-25-2017 11:16 PM)JJamiekinder Wrote:  Thanks Laurie! Sources seem to be a hot topic right now and my students enjoy discussing the topic. As far as the elimination of history in our educational system unfortunately I feel your correct. My district is actually taking two classes (Global I pre-history to 1500) and Global II 1500 to present) and combining the two into one class lasting one school year. Imagine that, combining the entire history of civilization into one class. And to top it off they are taking the teaching position and moving it into the science department. This is part of the push into taking our educational emphasis towards math and science. Not a very safe feeling for history teachers I can assure you that!

It doesn't give me a safe feeling about education in general. For years, I have felt that they are taking more away from the education curriculum than adding to it, which I feel that they should be doing. When I think of the loaded classes that I took, that were actually required and what they are studying today, I can't believe it.