Loading…
1
Watching the JFK documentary on Netflix versus reading the Warren Commission report
I always figured the Netflix doc would give me the full picture, but after reading the actual Warren Commission report from 1964, the difference was huge. The documentary focused on mood and unanswered questions, while the report had over 800 pages of specific witness statements and ballistics data from Dallas. It made me realize how much framing shapes a conspiracy debate. Anyone else find that primary sources change the game for you?
3 comments
Log in to join the discussion
Log In3 Comments
nancy2756mo ago
Yeah, it's crazy how much gets left out for the story.
8
coleman.jade6mo ago
Oh totally, @nancy275. I was just reading this article about some big event, and the version they told was so simple compared to what my friend who was actually there said happened. They cut out all the weird little details and side stories that made it make sense. It's like they take this messy, complicated thing and just iron it flat until it's a boring rectangle. Makes you wonder what's missing from every story you hear, you know?
10
felix_bailey455mo ago
Exactly, @nancy275. They always cut the parts that show how people actually messed up or got lucky. Real life is full of weird turns and second guesses, but stories get cleaned up to seem inevitable. It makes history feel fake, like everything was just a straight line to now. We only get the polished version, never the rough draft.
1