Hey 3.5 readers.
I’ve read a lot of articles on how sometimes hosting the Olympics ends up a bad deal for a city.
Cities often take up the challenge of hosting duties in the hopes that doing so will cause big stadiums, condo buildings etc to be constructed, thus revitalizing these cities.
Yet, often what happens is that after the big show, these big expensive buildings go unused.
I wonder, given this age of live streaming and technology – could the Olympic events be held at the same time all over the world?
It would probably make little difference to the viewer. Go to a reporter covering swimming in, I don’t know, Australia, then cut to the track and field events in LA or somewhere they have tracks and fields.
The only downside would be maybe you wouldn’t get that nice opening ceremony. Although surely some TV wiz could fix that and maybe have multiple little ceremonies all over the world. A dance number in Tokyo, a fireworks display in London, etc.
The athletes might miss out on the camaraderie. Perhaps the Olympics folks running the event would have reasons why it all has to be in the same place.
I don’t know. Just a thought. I’m not sure it would matter to the viewer or if the viewer would even notice if one competition is here and the other there.
What say you, 3.5 readers?
Bookshelf Battle 