Would History Channel be more popular/make more money by focusing on historical fiction?

As someone who loves history, I’ve always found most History Channel content disappointing. In the 90s, they focused on documentaries which I would have normally loved except almost all of them seemed to revolve around World War II. There was very little variety. Then, they hopped on the reality show train and have only recently shown signs of deboarding. Like World War II documentaries, they went entirely overboard. At a certain point, the series didn’t even have to pretend to somehow be related to history. The show finally went into scripted television with Vikings and, in my opinion, it’s great. They are also about to launch a series about the Knights Templar. And they did a mini-series on Jesus. Full disclosure: I love historical fiction (if written well). I think History Channel would have more success in getting kids interested in history, attracting a new audience, and keeping the audience they have if they started producing historical television shows. Obviously, the potential problem is capital and return investment. Reality shows are inexpensive and usually have an acceptable profit margin even for shows that have a really small audience. Television shows cost more. But, I think the prominence of streaming could offset that cost: the show can reach a wider audience which could boost ratings and a streaming service would likely pay more for the show.

Personally, I’d like the History Channel to focus on historical fiction and historical documentaries with only the most popular reality shows remaining. It just kills me because cable networks have shown there’s a demand for shows based on history and I have no doubt the same is true of documentaries. They just have to fund/create the product. Instead, most of their resources go to mindless reality television shows that have, at best, only a tangential relation to history. It’s just such a waste.

It’s kinda funny, but I hated history when I was growing up. I think it has to do with the way most history textbooks are written. I’ve looked at history textbooks now as an adult, and it almost seems to me that they intentionally make them as boring as possible. I can picture an editor saying “Nope, that bit is actually interesting, take it out.”

It was therefore pretty surprising me that I developed a huge interest in history, once I got out of high school and was no longer forced to read mind-numbingly boring textbooks. There’s a HUGE amount of interesting history out there. I think it’s a shame that they don’t teach any of that in school. I might have actually cared about my history classes if they had.

As for the History Channel, they used to occasionally run shows featuring historical fiction (it wasn’t all the Hitler channel). I used to like those shows, but they were never all that popular.

With most people not having any interest in real history, sadly, all of that reality crap is much more popular than the real history stuff that you and I like. It’s a shame, because I would love a History Channel that actually had something like HISTORY on it.

I personally think that there’s a demand out there for REAL educational and interesting programming, but those of us who like that sort of thing are now being completely ignored in favor of reality crap. Someone is missing an opportunity, I think. It’s not a huge opportunity, but there is a demand out there. Not everyone wants to watch the latest brain-dead reality crap.

It is a waste. I don’t see it changing any time soon, though.

Isn’t it all historical fiction these days or at least fictional history. I can’t remember the last time I saw a well-researched genuine historical program on the History Channel. Most people are far more interested in fake history of the aliens built the Pyramids type. The channel was quite good when it started years ago but inevitably as with all companies trying to make a profit it follows the money and that always leads to the lowest common denominator.

(Bolding mine)

I think you hot on something crucial here: unless you have an interested, interactive teacher than history (as taught in K-12) is pretty boring. In that respect, television shows can show the exciting or interesting history and make it alive in a way it never could be in a textbook. I think they can potentially convert kids who don’t particularly like history. Now, I don’t expect the shows to be documentaries, just have general historical accuracy because those who become really interested will seek out other sources. I mean, how awesome would it be to have a show about Hannibal, Alexander the Great, Boudicca, or Sulla? Or a show dealing with the Age of Exploration? The Revolutions of 1848? The list goes on and on. As you said, an opportunity is being missed. I’m sure there are enough people like you and me to make focusing on historical shows profitable.

I’d love History Channel if they actually did history programs most of the time instead of marathons of Pawn Stars and American Pickers. I love history, I rarely see it on HC.

I started a spin off thread to focus on experiences with history education in schools.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?p=20620360#post20620360

The British have been doing historical fiction well for a long time now. Series like Search for the Nile, The Voyage of Charles Darwin, Longitude, and Fall of Eagles, to name just a few, were superb. If I want shows like this, I go to Public Television.

I watch History Channel much less nowadays. The documentary shows, like Last Days of the Nazis and Modern Marvels are still good. The speculative stuff like American Ripper and Tracking Oswald promise a lot but seldom, if ever, deliver.

The simple answer why they don’t do more historical fiction is the same answer for most similar questions: money.

Compared to documentaries and reality TV, shooting historical drama is MUCH more expensive. MUCH more.

If the History Channel could put out more series even half as good as Vikings I’d be very happy indeed. But I suspect the writing and production talent required to do so just isn’t there, even if the money could be found.

It would be the hell out of “Ancient Aliens”, that’s for sure. I recently saw a documentary on there about WWI and WII and I was thrilled. I long for the days when it was “The Hitler Channel”. At least that was legit.

I like Extra History. They give a really good oversight while including enough points of interest to make things memorable.

Yeah, it kind of reminds me of GWB and Trump. Most Democrats HATED Bush and thought he was the worst now a lot would happily pull a tooth out if it would make him President again.

One the issue of money: I think producing quality, historical shows could actually be more profitable long term. Yes, they cost more money, which is why the channel will never exclusively go this route, but they also have much higher potential returns. Look at Vikings. It’s internationally popular and, I believe, is their highest rated show by a wide margin. The network will further make money when they sell the streaming rights. Also, unlike reality shows, fictional shows have a longer shelf life which translates to more money. Plus, they can re-use sets, costumes, etc. for money. After Vikings, the History Show could produce a show about Alfred the Great and the growing notion of a united England (yes, I know I’m describing The Last Kingdom. It was the first thing that popped into my head. By the way, if you haven’t watched that show you should. It’s on Netflix.) and just re-use some of the Vikings’ set. The more historical shows they produce, the more they can do this.

ironically it was modern marvels that started the “reality” shows on history channel when they would show a new ice road truckers episode every winter (and then added other dangerous professions like the NYC sandhogs)…

after the second show they realized it was one of the more popular episodes so they looked up some of the people theyed filmed and that’s how it all started ,

Although they would show actual historical stuff during the day like they had an excellent documentary on russias Tsar’s and things like how india was founded

But one thing that hurt them was the “history international/H2” channel flopping hard … then the parent owners started siphoning off the old content for other channels (the American heroes channel shows all the military stuff )

Everything about this post I am in agreement. Unless I specifically buy the book, I have the attention span of a goldfish even if I am actually really curious about the subject. They are written in the most boring manner for the most part. I really wish the History Channel would dial it back about 10 or 15 years, when there was actually stuff on that didn’t have to do with Antiques, Pumpkin Catapults and Nazi conspiracies.

It doesn’t matter. Cable is bloated with more crap channels than cable sytems are willing to charge for, and they’re soldl out with ads, most of which are ROS, advertisers don’t even specify which crap channel they get dumped on. Cable channels have discovered that the cheapest possible programming is saturating the revenue potential.

Many cable companies are dumping the few cable channels that do spend money to improve quality, as the viewer are unwilling to continue to be gouged.

Back to the History Channel, cable is dependent on video, and there just isn’t a lot of stock footage lying around of The Crusades or the Conquistadors. So they mined the hell out Hitlers archives.

I love history, and I’ve read a huge amount of it, but I stopped watching the History Channel some time ago. It’s too superficial and sensationalist.

If you’re interested in good quality radio programs, the BBC’s In Our Time series is excellent.

They have hundreds of 45 minute discussions by academics and experts about historical topics (and also philosophy, science, art, etc.) There is a huge range of topics. For each topic, they have guests who are experts on that particular field, and they chat, discuss, and sometimes argue about it.

All programs are free to listen to and download.

History archive:

You’d think the best solution would be for them to start producing their own documentaries. I imagine they’re as inexpensive as a reality show’s budget. Plus, documentaries have seemed to rise in popularity, probably because they’re more readily available due to streaming. Personally, I could live with them focusing on making good, diverse documentaries rather than historical shows if it meant the death of their reality programming.

ETA: Thanks a lot for the recommendation GreenWyvern. Sounds great! I will definitely check it out.

Long ago, for a little while, the History Channel aired a full-length war film and had guest military experts during the breaks commenting on the military science and tactics being portrayed. Thatg could be done with a very tiny budget, and be wonderfully informative.

Actually, it would be fun to see the same concept, with cops commenting on crime films or judges commenting on courtroom dramas.

**ESPECIALLY *if it meant the death of their reality programming!

*If I correctly understand the use of the term here. In my eyes, there is nothing **real **about “reality shows.”