Documentaries: Facts over Politics

There are a significant number of documentaries on mass school shootings nowadays. However the difference between a good documentary and a lousy one boils down to one statement: Facts over Politics. It has been my experience that when people watch documentaries they are looking mostly for accurate information on events and to a certain extent to be entertained. For I would love to meet the individual interested in a documentary on counting sand. As heartless as it is to think of an individual being entertained by the reenacting and dramatization of mass violence only adds insult to injury when the audience is being force-fed misconstrued facts to promote political agendas. Which as of now stems from one issue: Gun Rights vs. Gun Control, a matter that I plan to address in another post. I will provide two examples of good documentaries and one that is bad. 

Introducing Surviving Sandy Hook aired on March 4th, 2015 by BBC as part of their "This World series" directed by Jezza Neumann. This documentary focuses on the lives of the victim's families after the shooting; instead of just rehashing events as they unfolded. For that reason I can respect this film and give it a solid 6 out of 10. However throughout the film I noted a reoccurring theme of gun control (hence why it is mentioned here).
One thing I would like to highlight about this documentary is the interviews with the survivors, specifically the children. Who to the untrained eye appear not as traumatized as you would think from such a terrifying event. However considering the prowesses of the human mind to sheild itself from psychological harm



Introducing The Tower directed by Keith Maitland aired on March 13th 2016 and The Massacre at Columbine High by Discovery Channel as part of their Zero Hour series. The first documentary is on the shooting that occurred at University of Texas on August 1st, 1966 and the other is obviously about the mass shooting at Columbine High that occurred on April 20th 1999. 
What makes these documentaries so good aside from their ability to maintain the audiences attention is their objectivity to the facts. Yes the Discovery Channel could've included the martyrdoms of Rachel Scott and Cassie Bernall;  however I feel that would've skewed the presentation of the facts.
Now I grant that the facts of any single event in history is based on evidence and that evidence is often skewed by human error and time. However I am of the belief that if the evidence like shards from a shattered window can be put back in just the right way one can create the best view possible even with the presence of cracks.  Which in the end should be ultimate objective of every good documentary on mass school shootings.