Issue:The Interactive Truth - New York Times:

Specific:"What if we all vote on the truth? We don't need to, because we will be overruled by what becomes a legend most: entertainment."

Comment:History is not set in concrete. History is as the scientific method. Everything is a theory. When one drops a hammer, they are testing gravity. The existance of gravity is confirmed only when the hammer hits the floor, not the moment before. As new evidence becomes known, the old theories are tested. If history appears static and cast in concrete, it is only because the length of time since the last piece of new evidence relevant to a question of history is soo long.

There is a mechanism in the systems of society that process this confluence of time and fact.
Myths, legends and folklore are part of that mechanism.

The value of truth is in its static appearance.
The value of truth is that it is not dynamic.
The value of truth is that it is a baseline - a starting point
The value of truth is that anyone can test it,
and get the same answer as the last time.
Therefore the value of history is anyone can test it
and come to their own decision.

Society cannot endure long if the individual is told what is the truth.
It is human nature, the mechanical/analog nature of the brain to make decisions.
It is human nature to be able to separate an internally decision about a truth,
and the outward presentation of that decision.
History is the aggregation of these internal decisions about a truth from each member of a society.

To have a mechanism that enables the testing of truth is good.
To have a mechanism that enables the testing of truth faster is good.
Therefore a wikitorial (a wikipedia style editorial), while uncomfortable, has value.
The discomfort come from fear of change.

To which 2 things come to mind:
After 45 years - Change is a constant.
There truly is nothing to fear but fear itself.