Any historical record is monitored and edited by the pr of the company. Those in pr not doing that job are the ones sacked not others.
An Historical record would have to be done by a separate body with no connections for or against the organization.
Depends on the history and the organization. For example, technology companies generally keep very good, accurate historical records. Why? Because those records support their patent claims, which are fundamental to the marketability of their products. Materially editing a laboratory notebook, or an image of people present at a meeting, would be a firing offense in most cases.
While the two terms are often used interchangeably, there actually is a very real difference between spin and outright lying. It's a PR person's job to assemble a narrative, to emphasize or de-emphasize events so as to portray their client in the best possible light. Fine. That's spin. But a PR person who is caught in an out and out lie -- say, by presenting multiple versions of the same image -- cannot represent their client effectively. By being demonstrably untrustworthy, they invite close scrutiny of every aspect of the narrative they're trying to assemble. As has in fact happened in this case.
Put another way:
Whenever possible, tell the truth. It's easier to remember!