Bias is perspective, not automatically deceit

Why are people so certain about contested history?

Headlines simplify context; historians should recognise every source's perspective and compare evidence rather than equating bias with dishonesty.

Sources carry perspectives even when their writers are not lying. Even a Royal Navy movement return assumes that reports were accurate and current when compiled. Eyewitnesses at a ship's boilers, guns, bridge or combat information centre would also experience different parts of the same action. Historians therefore compare accounts, including evidence likely to challenge their own assumptions, rather than treating bias as proof of dishonesty.