Is BBC history, history?

Perhaps it was a little odd, but growing up I was always watching BBC history documentaries. I was captivated by the presentation of the past by confident and capable presenters like, Simon Scharma, Simon Sebag-Montefiore, Janina Ramerez and Lucy Worsley. They seemed to bring their subject matter to life without a need for flashy editing or sensationalism but instead through their passion for the past. In fact, I would go as far to say that were it not for the well-produced history documentaries that used to inhabit the BBC, I would probably not be studying history as one half of my degree. Unfortunately, on a recent trip home (I don’t pay the license fee in Cardiff) I went to the history section of the iPlayer and found very little of interest. Whereas before there was a mixture of good quality programs on a range of historical subjects, I instead found a strange mixture of, Nazi documentaries acted out with an anonymous voiceover, sycophantic programs about the royal family and even a documentary about Andrew Tate. Not exactly the sort of history I grew up watching.

I ended up watching some of a new series called Shakespeare rise of a genius which seemed to have all the flaws of the current history offering from the BBC. It used an unseen narrator combined with over generalized commentary formed by random selection of commentators in a poor contrast to earlier takes on Shakespeare’s early life such as by Micheal Wood a few years ago. The general lack of substance combined with overly dramatic acted scenes led me to question if I was even watching a documentary at all. This is not an experience limited to just this series, increasingly the BBC seems to be neglecting its former commitment to informative programming, replacing it with easier to digest but ultimately worse content more in line with what gets pumped out of Netflix or its other competitors. Of course, there is still a trickle of new programs presented by Lucy Worsley comparable to what the BBC used to make but I would argue that this is the exception that proves the rule. Increasingly she appears like the last of a dying breed of tv historians, with her peers steadily deserting the BBC for new opportunities. For example, whereas Simon Sebag-Montefiore’s previous books have been accompanied by a documentary, I doubt this will be the case for his latest history of the world. Instead, I will have to watch one of the many programs about the royal family, complete with a typically groveling narration.

The issues I have mentioned are probably not the fault of just the history section of the BBC but the institution more broadly. Firstly, the issue of public history is more contested, I would argue, than ever before and thus decay of BBC history could be symptomatic of an unease with how to address the past. Secondly, and most importantly, the BBC is in the greatest uncertainty about its future than ever before. It cannot rely upon the masses of public money as it did in the past, and so it must strive to make ends meet. That is almost certainly why it pushes so many crime dramas, which it knows will garner attention and thus revenue, particularly abroad. By contrast the history programming of the past was the opposite of this model. Content was often expensive, shot on locations thousands of miles away and garnered a more limited audience. And yet if the BBC is to continue the license fee model, I would argue that it needs to make high quality documentaries that stand out against the offerings of other providers to justify its position. Programs like Civilizations represented a commitment to higher ideals than just pure entertainment, and in a world of fake history, as found on Netflix, it is sad to see these values slipping away.

History has so many narratives and lessons to tell us, and the BBC can still be at the forefront of giving us just that. If it can revive its commitment to quality history programs, it might find that will in turn regain some of the public confidence that it has been hemorrhaging in recent years. Whilst also providing an alternative to the big American media giants who increasingly dominate our media.