3 ms·

Eh, partly. But it's also inherent in running an organisation with 24 official languages. Let's say you had really strong opinions on this, and you wanted to

Eh, partly. But it's also inherent in running an organisation with 24 official languages. Let's say you had really strong opinions on this, and you wanted to rally voters for a letter-writing campaign. Good luck coordinating the Spanish-speakers, the German-speakers and the Polish-speakers and so on. All of whom also have different TV networks, different newspapers, different radio, presumably different social media and so on. And politicians have the same problem - maybe you're an amazing public speaker. Maybe you've got the farming subsidy policy equivalent of the Gettysburg Address. Clear, succinct, witty, persuasive, honest, passionate - everyone who hears it will be fired up to support your vision. But if you can only deliver that speech in Portuguese? Good luck with that. Hell, look at this very discussion: I know first-hand about the complex relationship between the EU with the British parliament, press and electorate. But I have no idea what the equivalent situation is in the Czech Republic.

ljlolel 3y ago
Interesting, maybe that’s totally changed as of today with the AI voice and language and lip synching tech we have now
rickdeckard 3y ago
That's all a symptom of the current state of affairs. If citizens would hold their government accountable for their actions on EU-level, the ruling political parties wouldn't send people to the EU who are ill-equipped to communicate/execute. But it's also an inherent problem of the EU. In retrospect, they shouldn't have left communication with citizens to the EU-members, expecting that they would communicate based on common interest. As it turns out, the local governments are much more comfortable to celebrate themselves for everything positive, and blame everything negative on these "EU overlords". The EU charter should have included the means for the Union to communicate directly with citizens, i.e. the basis to have their own local news-channels. I can see improvements in communication nowadays, with EU press-releases and announcement carrying over into local (online) news at least. The fact that none of those messages are already carried by the local government speaks volumes...
- michaelt 3y ago
  > That's all a symptom of the current state of affairs. If citizens would hold their government accountable for their actions on EU-level, the ruling political parties wouldn't send people to the EU who are ill-equipped to communicate/execute. What I'm saying is that everyone is ill-equipped to communicate, when communications are conducted in 24 languages. Imagine a Greek newspaper decided to send a team of dedicated EU reporters to Brussels - how are they supposed to talk to the delegates from Sweden and Slovenia and Spain? (and if you're thinking "they'll just communicate in english" let me remind you that less than 2% of the EU population lives in a country where english is an official language) > As it turns out, the local governments are much more comfortable to celebrate themselves for everything positive, and blame everything negative on these "EU overlords". Truth. But IMO pre-Brexit a big reason the British government had a lot of influence over the British press (and vice-versa) while the EU government didn't was the simple issue of speaking the same language and being in the same city.
  - rickdeckard 3y ago
    I get what you're saying but that's a non-issue. At plenary meeting and conferences every country is in the same situation, they communicate via an Armada of interpreters, just like they do at the UN, at the WTO, the WHO, the NATO, and so on. Outside of those they communicate in English and/or French. If a Greek newspaper is sending a journalist who can't speak English or French they sent the wrong person. If a local government sends a politician into the EU who can't communicate in English or French they sent the wrong person. Also, it would already be sufficient for the cause if Greek newspapers would put the spotlight on GREEK politicians in Brussels. So far not even THAT is happening in a sufficient manner... > But IMO pre-Brexit a big reason the British government had a lot of influence over the British press (and vice-versa) while the EU government didn't was the simple issue of speaking the same language and being in the same city. Every single press-Release of the EU is done in English language. Granted, the EU doesn't invite to press-conferences in London to talk to the local press, that's the job of the local government. Pre-Brexit it would have been the job of the British government to promote the spirit of "We are European", but as everywhere it is more useful to their narrative to promote "We are Nationalists!"

ljlolel 3y ago

Interesting, maybe that’s totally changed as of today with the AI voice and language and lip synching tech we have now

rickdeckard 3y ago

That's all a symptom of the current state of affairs. If citizens would hold their government accountable for their actions on EU-level, the ruling political parties wouldn't send people to the EU who are ill-equipped to communicate/execute. But it's also an inherent problem of the EU. In retrospect, they shouldn't have left communication with citizens to the EU-members, expecting that they would communicate based on common interest. As it turns out, the local governments are much more comfortable to celebrate themselves for everything positive, and blame everything negative on these "EU overlords". The EU charter should have included the means for the Union to communicate directly with citizens, i.e. the basis to have their own local news-channels. I can see improvements in communication nowadays, with EU press-releases and announcement carrying over into local (online) news at least. The fact that none of those messages are already carried by the local government speaks volumes...

michaelt 3y ago
> That's all a symptom of the current state of affairs. If citizens would hold their government accountable for their actions on EU-level, the ruling political parties wouldn't send people to the EU who are ill-equipped to communicate/execute. What I'm saying is that everyone is ill-equipped to communicate, when communications are conducted in 24 languages. Imagine a Greek newspaper decided to send a team of dedicated EU reporters to Brussels - how are they supposed to talk to the delegates from Sweden and Slovenia and Spain? (and if you're thinking "they'll just communicate in english" let me remind you that less than 2% of the EU population lives in a country where english is an official language) > As it turns out, the local governments are much more comfortable to celebrate themselves for everything positive, and blame everything negative on these "EU overlords". Truth. But IMO pre-Brexit a big reason the British government had a lot of influence over the British press (and vice-versa) while the EU government didn't was the simple issue of speaking the same language and being in the same city.
- rickdeckard 3y ago
  I get what you're saying but that's a non-issue. At plenary meeting and conferences every country is in the same situation, they communicate via an Armada of interpreters, just like they do at the UN, at the WTO, the WHO, the NATO, and so on. Outside of those they communicate in English and/or French. If a Greek newspaper is sending a journalist who can't speak English or French they sent the wrong person. If a local government sends a politician into the EU who can't communicate in English or French they sent the wrong person. Also, it would already be sufficient for the cause if Greek newspapers would put the spotlight on GREEK politicians in Brussels. So far not even THAT is happening in a sufficient manner... > But IMO pre-Brexit a big reason the British government had a lot of influence over the British press (and vice-versa) while the EU government didn't was the simple issue of speaking the same language and being in the same city. Every single press-Release of the EU is done in English language. Granted, the EU doesn't invite to press-conferences in London to talk to the local press, that's the job of the local government. Pre-Brexit it would have been the job of the British government to promote the spirit of "We are European", but as everywhere it is more useful to their narrative to promote "We are Nationalists!"