Richard Shenkman, a noted historian and author of the acclaimed book Presidential Ambition, is the editor and founder of http://wwwHistoryNewsNetwork.org, an Internet magazine featuring articles by historians and on current events. Shenkman has written five books on history, including Legends, Lies and Cherished Myths of American History, which was on the New York Times Best Seller List for four months.

Shenkman previously was an investigative reporter for KUTV News in Salt Lake City, Utah, and then became the Washington, D.C. Bureau Chief for KUTV. He later served as Managing Editor of KITO-TV (CBS affiliate) in Seattle, and was Managing Editor and Co-founder of tompaine.com, an Internet magazine started in 1998.

An Emmy-award winning investigative reporter, Shenkman exposed an orphanage in Thailand exploited by a children's sex ring and also uncovered fraud and abuse at Utah's largest power company, leading to a rebate of over $60 million to state rate payers.

An adjunct lecturer in journalism at American University, Shenkman graduated with a Cum laude degree in History from Vasser College and attended the Program in American Civilization at Harvard Graduate School. He has been a frequent guest on national television shows, including the Today Show and Prime Time Live, and also appears regularly on Fox News, CNN, and MSNBC.

Derek Alger: You recently launched HistoryNewsNetwork. What prompted you to start an online site about history?

Richard Shenkman: I have long been frustrated with Americans' ignorance of history. Two decades ago I wrote an op-ed for the New York Times in which I chided journalists for not working more history into their pieces. Around that time I started a TV show on Manhattan Cable in which I interviewed historians about current events in an attempt to practice what I was preaching. Of course, nobody picked up the show. I have to admit it was pretty dry, which in TV means bad. Clearly, a show covering current events and history wasn't going to be a TV spectacular. But then along came the Internet and it occurred to me one day -- while taking a shower -- that this might be the perfect vehicle for bringing history into the public square. On the cheap you could set up a magazine and give historians a platform to talk about current events.

DA: History is inescapable in truly understanding current events.

RS: Yes it is and yet how few people -- either policy makers or reporters covering them -- bother with history. And the public couldn't care less. So we make old mistakes over and over again.

DA: Can you give an example?

RS: Take the debate about the surplus back in the Spring. It was ludicrous. Politicians spoke -- and journalists took them seriously! -- about this sea of black ink as far as the eye could see. Well, as Bernard Weisberger pointed out in an article we published, surpluses tend to disappear really fast. To think that we could budget for a decade in advance -- which we have never done before -- was silly. Budgeting just two years or so in advance was damn near impossible. But politicians went ahead and tried budgeting for 10 years because it was politically convenient. Republicans wanted to give back to their supporters big tax breaks; Democrats wanted to promise their supporters expensive new federal goodies. The media should have called both groups on the absurdity of the debate but did not.

DA: Online publications create an instant community of discourse. How has HistoryNewsNetwork been greeted?

RS: Well, historians have approved, of course, because they like being taken seriously. HNN gives them a chance to reflect on events before a national audience. While a few historians scorn current events -- and have said some nasty things to me -- the overwhelming majority understand what we are trying to do and approve. The few who have reservations seem to feel threatened by public attention.

DA: Why is that?

RS: They'd rather be left alone. In part, that's because historians are wary that involvement in public debates will possibly lead them to corruption. Like old Bancroft, every page they write will be a vote for their party. (I could name a few who have been corrupted, but won't). In part it's also due to the Vietnam War. The war badly divided history departments around the country, leading academics to withdraw from the public stage in hopes of avoiding quarrels. One of our goals is to get them to return; to say, it's safe now, come back.