Like TV historians frequently do. I've heard a few who really should keep up with later discoveries, spout bollocks that they learned twenty or thirty years ago and still regard it as truth. Ffs, there was one priceless occasion when I heard a recent TV history programme utterly fail to mention Ultra in relation to Montgomery, or the Battle of Britain, where the credit was given to other factors which had been used to explain the course of battles at the time and since up until the 70s, when Ultra details started to be released. For a historian of WW2 to be so utterly ignorant of the serious importance of Ultra in the winning of various campaigns was gobsmacking.