Addendum on Documentaries Post

As I've been binging on the Space Race (and right in the middle of finishing a Titanic/Eastland project no less!), I have made a couple of further observations about documentaries.  I did not mention these in my main post on the topic and so I will speak of them here.  

The first thing I talked about was listening to how writers use the language in the documentary.  A good writer will be precise in his language and back up his assertions with facts. 
    Sometimes you will get a piece about something in history or science that isn't very well-known.  This is to be expected as history and science are always on the move.  But beware of titles that say "The Untold Story", "The True/Real Story", "The Forgotten Story", or anything like that.  Titles like these sound dramatic and may get the viewer interested, but they make an assertion that may or may not be true.  
        I have read and reread a book called The Sinking of the EASTLAND: America's Forgotten Tragedy.  This is one of the few cases in which the "forgotten" label is justified.  The capsizing has become largely obscure despite happening right in the middle of the Chicago Harbor.  So when the book says that it's a forgotten tragedy, I can believe it.  
        Last week I saw a documentary called "Apollo 13: The Real Story".  How are the makers sure that it's the "real story"?  Most people in the U.S. know about the incident and so to try to claim that there is a real story is foolish at best. 

Which brings me to my second point.  Take note of the documentary's tone.  Every now and then you will get a documentary written by someone with an axe to grind be it political, social, or whatever.  When that happens you sometimes get conspiracy theories.  And conspiracy theories will be heavy handed and unpleasant.  Last week I tried watching a documentary called Secret Space: The Soyuz 1 Coverup.  I wanted to know about the Soyuz 1 disaster that killed Russian cosmonaut Vladimir Komarov.  The documentary indulged in the Ilyushin myth and even claimed that Yuri Gagarin's death in a plane crash was engineered by Brezhnev.  And the narration throughout the documentary was harsh and unsubtle.  
     It is true that the Soviet government tried to cover up a lot of things.  But the conspiracy theories and overall harsh tone of the documentary made it unwatchable.  

I like documentaries that are objective with their language.  If you want to say that something is the "Untold/Real/Forgotten Story" or whatever, you have to be able to back up your assertion.  While something may be genuinely obscure like in the case of the Eastland, others may seem obscure but turn out to be little more than fringe activities that had been part of an ongoing issue.  Or it may turn out be a conspiracy theory, which means someone is telling a lie.  Use language precisely.