At a time when historical narratives are increasingly contested, the October 7 MIA panel “What’s the Future of History” gathered broadcasters and commissioning editors to reflect on the place of factual history programming in today’s fractured media landscape. Moderated by Krishan Arora, UK producer and consultant at Mixing Media, the session featured Laurent Filliung (ARTE GEIE), Elisabeth Hagstedt (Histoire TV), Caroline Haidacher (ORF), Sergiy Nadzelskyy (Suspilne, Ukraine), Proinsias Ní Ghrainne (TG4), and Mikael Österby (SVT International).
Arora opened the debate by recalling that history “is about dates,” noting the symbolic resonance of holding the discussion on 7 October — a date marked by recent tragic events that prompted death and destruction in both Israel and Palestine. He stressed that “many countries try to rewrite history and use it for propaganda purposes,” arguing that “getting facts right is more important than ever.” He lamented the increasing pressure on public media worldwide, citing the recent decision by PBS’s American Experience to halt new commissions as a symptom of democracy “under attack from its own government.”
The conversation began with a simple yet profound question: does history have a future?
ARTE GEIA’s Filliung answered emphatically: “If you don’t have memory or history, you have no future. We’re not blank people with blank memories.” Quoting Hegel, he added: “The only thing we learn from history is that we learn nothing from history — but we need it, because amnesia is not a normal state of mind.”
For Hagstedt, Histoire TV’s mission statement says it all: the keys of history [are] to understand today. “This is more than a slogan,” she explained, “it’s exactly what we do — because history is the future.”
Haidacher, who oversees ORF’s long-running historical slot, said that since its launch in 2014, the strand “has had a solid audience, and nothing questions its relevance.” She is “totally convinced we need it — and the audience wants it — because we can draw so much from history for our present.”
Ní Ghrainne highlighted the global reach of TG4, Ireland’s Irish-language public broadcaster, noting that its audience extends across North America, the UK, and Australia. “History is extremely important,” she said. “Our times are changing so drastically — people are losing faith in governments, institutions, religions. We’ve no leaders to turn to anymore, so we’re looking elsewhere — and everywhere, to be brutally honest.”
Österby, representing SVT, echoed the sentiment, observing that “the reason why there’s a future for history is because the audience wants it.” Ukrainian Nadzelskyy added a more cautionary note, recalling his Soviet-era schooling “where facts were mixed with propaganda — just as Russia does today.”
The panel then turned to the issue of national versus transnational perspectives in historical programming. Haidacher said ORF’s weekly history slot is composed entirely of co-productions and acquisitions rather than domestic productions. “Our challenge is to find topics that resonate with the Austrian audience,” she said. “We need the big stories, the big names, the big moments in history.” She cited as an example a recent series on the love story between Alfred Nobel and Bertha von Suttner, as well as co-productions exploring the Normans, and a forthcoming project on Machiavelli. “Austrians love Italy,” she noted, “and we need to reflect that in our programming.”
Filliung stressed that ARTE’s perspective must always be European: “Most projects come to us with a national viewpoint, but we must always think beyond that. If you’re a keen historian, you look for whimsical little histories that tell you something new — and through those, you end up with the bigger picture.”
Hagstedt described Histoire TV’s editorial approach: “We don’t do dinosaurs — we start with antiquity, but we go up to contemporary geopolitics. We covered Ukraine too. As long as it’s analytical, not reportage, we’re interested.” She mentioned a successful series on conspiracy theories featuring a well-known French comedian, who “takes each conspiracy theory, explains it, and debunks it with humour and precision.”
Arora asked whether the authorship of stories matters. Ní Ghrainne replied that “the closer you are to the story, the better,” mentioning Éire agus Na Chéad Náisiúin, a landmark TG4 documentary exploring the historical connections between Ireland and the First Nations of North America. “We let the story unravel naturally,” she said, adding that the film attracted strong international media attention, including coverage in The Guardian and other broadsheets.
Österby, in a lighter tone, remarked that “every co-pro about Vikings, I’m always involved,” before turning to the realities of digital consumption. “In Sweden, 65% of content is consumed online. The audience doesn’t look for bronze medals — they go straight for the gold, the best platforms.”
Nadzelskyy stressed the importance of fact-checking and integrity: “Every historical film — if there’s no proof or expert testimony, we won’t put it in the cut. Clickbait is not for us. We double- and triple-check facts.”
The discussion also touched on the question of telling other nations’ histories. Hagstedt argued that international collaboration can bring valuable perspectives: “Years ago, a French company made a documentary about Northern Ireland, and a British expert was furious. But a foreign viewpoint can offer objectivity — as long as the right people are involved, of course.”
As for the shift to digital platforms, Österby noted that SVT is “the only remaining linear channel in Sweden,” while all others have moved fully online. “It’s a different game, super hard to survive — but history works there. People long for understanding.” Haidacher agreed, admitting that while ORF still has “a very loyal linear audience,” younger viewers are “harder to bring back,” prompting the channel to invest in new historical formats for streaming platforms.
The session concluded with a look to the future: could AI-generated archival footage and reconstructions soon become standard? Opinions were mixed. Filliung said that it depends “if you appreciate mediocrity,” stressing that “you need skilled people checking prompts and images — maybe in the future, but not right now.” Nadzelskyy agreed, though he predicted that “we will eventually have entirely AI-made content, hybrids, and fully human-made productions — all co-existing.”
