[flagged]
The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
21–30 of 58 posts
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#22I know this is not the right place for this but english is not my first language. How is "have" the correct verb here? Shouldn't it be "has"? Like, the crew is the subject, and it has 35 seconds. I'm trying to understand what I'm missing here, because I'm sure BBC did not make a mistake
I once read a Wikiepedia article starting with "Pink Floyd are..." and immediately hit edit. I saw a banner comment saying its correct according to British English. Since then I've noticed lots of "Company are...". I also wonder why India uses "Company is...". My guess is Britain adopted it after Indian independence.
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#23Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve been a fan for almost 18 years, ever since some euro friends were talking about the voting system on IRC. Love the intersection between culture and geopolitics.
What politics? Saying or doing anything political gets you mad shade thrown your way, a lot of bad press, up to expulsion. I get that the big scrutiny against overt politics is something political in itself, but... To me the strictness towards the presiding mainstream opinion, the forced harmony, makes it less interesting.
It's not what they say on the stage but how voters from different countries behave.
UK: 0 points total
Cyprus: 12 points from Greece
Azerbaijan: 12 points from Turkey
San Marino singer: A Turkish guy sings in English
Armenia: the song is in English instead of Armenian
It gives you a clue on what's going on in every country. How nationalistic they feel this year, are they fixing their issues with their arch enemies, are they opening up to different cultures, do they feel part of the community, is everybody still annoyed by the Brits and did they took the event seriously enough to send a good song etc.
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#24Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#25Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’ve been a fan for almost 18 years, ever since some euro friends were talking about the voting system on IRC. Love the intersection between culture and geopolitics.
What politics? Saying or doing anything political gets you mad shade thrown your way, a lot of bad press, up to expulsion. I get that the big scrutiny against overt politics is something political in itself, but... To me the strictness towards the presiding mainstream opinion, the forced harmony, makes it less interesting.
And yet the event is full of politics. From the voting cliques and countries favouring specific allies, to lyrics with hidden (or not so hidden¹) messages, it's everywhere. A lot of it is on a meta level though, leading to an event which taken at face value seems devoid of politics.
1: Georgia's entry in 2009 was called “We Don't Wanna Put In”…
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#26Earlier quoted context omitted.
What politics? Saying or doing anything political gets you mad shade thrown your way, a lot of bad press, up to expulsion. I get that the big scrutiny against overt politics is something political in itself, but... To me the strictness towards the presiding mainstream opinion, the forced harmony, makes it less interesting.
It's not what they say on the stage but how voters from different countries behave. UK: 0 points total Cyprus: 12 points from Greece Azerbaijan: 12 points from Turkey San Marino singer: A Turkish guy sings in English Armenia: the song is in English instead of Armenian It gives you a clue on what's going on in every country. How nationalistic they feel this year, are they fixing their issues with their arch enemies, a…
!
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#27I know this is not the right place for this but english is not my first language. How is "have" the correct verb here? Shouldn't it be "has"? Like, the crew is the subject, and it has 35 seconds. I'm trying to understand what I'm missing here, because I'm sure BBC did not make a mistake
Even native English speakers disagree on this.
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#28Honestly this sounds way more interesting than Eurovision itself.
always has been. Eurovision almost each and every year had two streams of interest - contest itself and the technology and logistics behind it. I vividly remember the whole 1996 big talk around virtual stage tech by Silicon Graphics https://tech.ebu.ch/docs/techreview/trev_268-hughes.pdf Their brand was even prominently displayed and mentioned before and during the live event.
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#29Earlier quoted context omitted.
What politics? Saying or doing anything political gets you mad shade thrown your way, a lot of bad press, up to expulsion. I get that the big scrutiny against overt politics is something political in itself, but... To me the strictness towards the presiding mainstream opinion, the forced harmony, makes it less interesting.
It's not what they say on the stage but how voters from different countries behave. UK: 0 points total Cyprus: 12 points from Greece Azerbaijan: 12 points from Turkey San Marino singer: A Turkish guy sings in English Armenia: the song is in English instead of Armenian It gives you a clue on what's going on in every country. How nationalistic they feel this year, are they fixing their issues with their arch enemies, a…
The separate public and jury votes does now help with that, a bit.
Re: The 'invisible crew' who have 35 seconds to prevent a Eurovision blunder
#30I know this is not the right place for this but english is not my first language. How is "have" the correct verb here? Shouldn't it be "has"? Like, the crew is the subject, and it has 35 seconds. I'm trying to understand what I'm missing here, because I'm sure BBC did not make a mistake
Even native English speakers disagree on this.
[deleted]