ajsy0203 wrote:
Some netizens claimed that Ariadna was the "real Miss Universe 2015" just because Steve Harvey announced it first and think that the first announcement of winner is final & irrevocable? Some people are still committing this type of "historical revisionism" in the world of pageants.
ajsy0203 wrote:
Some netizens claimed that Ariadna was the "real Miss Universe 2015" just because Steve Harvey announced it first and think that the first announcement of winner is final & irrevocable? Some people are still committing this type of "historical revisionism" in the world of pageants.
Prozac wrote:ajsy0203 wrote:
Some netizens claimed that Ariadna was the "real Miss Universe 2015" just because Steve Harvey announced it first and think that the first announcement of winner is final & irrevocable? Some people are still committing this type of "historical revisionism" in the world of pageants.
ajsy0203, I think this example falls under historical distortion rather than historical revisionism. To understand these
two terms they need to be defined separately and making examples is a must to drive home the meaning.
If we are going to listen to Krasner (2019), he defined historical revisionism as the reinterpretation of a historical account
or narrative based on actual facts and aforementioned evidence. The best example of this was Lapulapu and Magellan.
I used to hear my history teachers telling us that Lapulapu killed Magellan last March 16, 1521. Later studies found out
that somebody under Lapulapu's command did the killing. As we see, kudos to the historians and the evidence they accu-
mulate, past events that were ambiguous became crystal clear as they were clarified. This can be considered historical
revisionism.
While according to Cristobal (2019), historical distortion occurs when historical accounts or narratives are changed to suit
a personal agenda. It involves disinformation and lies to change history. I hope nobody will bash me for quoting the example
of one writer Joshua Corcuera about historical distortion and he mentioned the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos and how "he
was often praised by many of his loyalists to this day. Some of them spread misleading content and lies on social media.
One example of those lies is that the Marcoses did not steal from state coffers even though several court rulings, at home
and abroad, ruled otherwise."
"There is also clear and compelling evidence of human rights violations during the martial law years but many loyalists either
deny that this truly happened as they defend the Marcoses from blame. There are even bloggers on YouTube who contradict
historians when it comes to the controversies and atrocities committed by the Marcoses."
"Worse, many people believe in bloggers rather than historians when it comes to history. To me, they seem like severely ill
patients who believe more in the remedies suggested by quack doctors rather than licensed medical professionals. Obviously,
since lies and disinformation are involved, claiming that there were no human rights violations or corruption under Marcos’
martial law is a form of historical distortion."
In the case of Ariadna, if social media platforms such as Facebook and YouTube are being used and taken advantage of, to
spread disinformation in an attempt for powerful people to advance their interests... then it is historical distortion.
ajsy0203 wrote:Prozac wrote:ajsy0203 wrote:
Some netizens claimed that Ariadna was the "real Miss Universe 2015" just because Steve Harvey announced it first and think that the first announcement of winner is final & irrevocable? Some people are still committing this type of "historical revisionism" in the world of pageants.
ajsy0203, I think this example falls under historical distortion rather than historical revisionism. To understand these
two terms they need to be defined separately and making examples is a must to drive home the meaning.
If we are going to listen to Krasner (2019), he defined historical revisionism as the reinterpretation of a historical account
or narrative based on actual facts and aforementioned evidence. The best example of this was Lapulapu and Magellan.
I used to hear my history teachers telling us that Lapulapu killed Magellan last March 16, 1521. Later studies found out
that somebody under Lapulapu's command did the killing. As we see, kudos to the historians and the evidence they accu-
mulate, past events that were ambiguous became crystal clear as they were clarified. This can be considered historical
revisionism.
While according to Cristobal (2019), historical distortion occurs when historical accounts or narratives are changed to suit
a personal agenda. It involves disinformation and lies to change history. I hope nobody will bash me for quoting the example
of one writer Joshua Corcuera about historical distortion and he mentioned the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos and how "he
was often praised by many of his loyalists to this day. Some of them spread misleading content and lies on social media.
One example of those lies is that the Marcoses did not steal from state coffers even though several court rulings, at home
and abroad, ruled otherwise."
"There is also clear and compelling evidence of human rights violations during the martial law years but many loyalists either
deny that this truly happened as they defend the Marcoses from blame. There are even bloggers on YouTube who contradict
historians when it comes to the controversies and atrocities committed by the Marcoses."
"Worse, many people believe in bloggers rather than historians when it comes to history. To me, they seem like severely ill
patients who believe more in the remedies suggested by quack doctors rather than licensed medical professionals. Obviously,
since lies and disinformation are involved, claiming that there were no human rights violations or corruption under Marcos’
martial law is a form of historical distortion."
In the case of Ariadna, if social media platforms such as Facebook and YouTube are being used and taken advantage of, to
spread disinformation in an attempt for powerful people to advance their interests... then it is historical distortion.
Most of Colombians are still committing this historical distortion. Unfortunately all 4 judges voted for Pia and EY & MUO production staff stopped Ariadna from celebrating her short lived "victory".
Prozac wrote:ajsy0203 wrote:Prozac wrote:ajsy0203 wrote:
Some netizens claimed that Ariadna was the "real Miss Universe 2015" just because Steve Harvey announced it first and think that the first announcement of winner is final & irrevocable? Some people are still committing this type of "historical revisionism" in the world of pageants.
ajsy0203, I think this example falls under historical distortion rather than historical revisionism. To understand these
two terms they need to be defined separately and making examples is a must to drive home the meaning.
If we are going to listen to Krasner (2019), he defined historical revisionism as the reinterpretation of a historical account
or narrative based on actual facts and aforementioned evidence. The best example of this was Lapulapu and Magellan.
I used to hear my history teachers telling us that Lapulapu killed Magellan last March 16, 1521. Later studies found out
that somebody under Lapulapu's command did the killing. As we see, kudos to the historians and the evidence they accu-
mulate, past events that were ambiguous became crystal clear as they were clarified. This can be considered historical
revisionism.
While according to Cristobal (2019), historical distortion occurs when historical accounts or narratives are changed to suit
a personal agenda. It involves disinformation and lies to change history. I hope nobody will bash me for quoting the example
of one writer Joshua Corcuera about historical distortion and he mentioned the late dictator Ferdinand Marcos and how "he
was often praised by many of his loyalists to this day. Some of them spread misleading content and lies on social media.
One example of those lies is that the Marcoses did not steal from state coffers even though several court rulings, at home
and abroad, ruled otherwise."
"There is also clear and compelling evidence of human rights violations during the martial law years but many loyalists either
deny that this truly happened as they defend the Marcoses from blame. There are even bloggers on YouTube who contradict
historians when it comes to the controversies and atrocities committed by the Marcoses."
"Worse, many people believe in bloggers rather than historians when it comes to history. To me, they seem like severely ill
patients who believe more in the remedies suggested by quack doctors rather than licensed medical professionals. Obviously,
since lies and disinformation are involved, claiming that there were no human rights violations or corruption under Marcos’
martial law is a form of historical distortion."
In the case of Ariadna, if social media platforms such as Facebook and YouTube are being used and taken advantage of, to
spread disinformation in an attempt for powerful people to advance their interests... then it is historical distortion.
Most of Colombians are still committing this historical distortion. Unfortunately all 4 judges voted for Pia and EY & MUO production staff stopped Ariadna from celebrating her short lived "victory".
Thanks ajsy 0203. And while we are at it, there are still 2 terms we need to know while talking historical distortion and
historical revisionism. They are historical denial or historical negation which are both forms of historical distortion.
By itself, historical revisionism is “considered important and necessary, and must be done continually. Historical revisionism
is not a bad thing because many things need to be revised in the way that history is presented.
Historical denial or negation (according to one Inquirer writer) is when there is an effort to deny that there were thousands
killed during martial law, or there is a concerted attempt to repudiate that billions were stolen from the national coffers,
that’s denialism, that’s distortion,
One “outright lie, was the claim that the Marcos period was a “golden age for the Philippines” despite evidence to the contrary.
With regards to Ariadna, let them deny, negate and distort facts and history. People know better and after seven years they
should come to terms with it and move on. There are a lot of things more important to focus your energies ... not drown
or wallow in self pity and self-destruct!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users