Me, too.. With as many different teams that are attending, I am surprised. Even if they just live streamed the finals, people would definitely watch and it would bring more recognition to their awesome program and event. Win/win.
Livestreaming is an additional expense, and the question is not "would it bring recognition to the program", it's "would it bring revenue to the program"? Or even "is it worth the hassle to contract with a production company and have even more moving parts to a competition day"? It is 100% a decision to be made by the host school. Live streams are a privilege, not a right, and more people need to recognize that. Thank you for coming to my TED talk.
Actually, it isn't a huge expense. No large production team is needed. Most schools who host competitions make the decision, not a school board, with the reason being it is simple to do. Many smaller schools who have hosted competitions this year have set up a video camera and live streamed via YouTube. For the upcoming competition the school I teach at is hosting, we are live streaming at a cost of $0. As a coach, the more opportunities there are for people to watch and learn about show choir and fine arts, the more opportunities there are for people to understand the importance of the arts in schools, especially as these programs tend to be cut from budgets before other programs. Additionally, with COVID, providing opportunities for those who can't attend in person to watch one of their family members or friends perform is appreciated.
And yet most of the livestreams done on a $0 budget are the ones that are reamed to no end on this site by throwaway accounts for being "unwatchable" and the like... while I cannot comment on Mo Show's upcoming livestream, just going from experience as an observer in the court of public opinion for the past half-decade on this website. I am clearly not against livestreams and/or expanding the fine arts community, but no school should ever feel intimidated/put down/inferior for choosing not to run a livestream. Your school wants to produce one? Fantastic. Your school doesn't have the equipment/volunteers and won't have one? Also fantastic. North Polk has put together a really impressive lineup in both quality and quantity in both competitors and the judging panel; they have no further obligation for a livestream.
Why so defensive? Nobody has implied they haven't put together a stellar line up. It is BECAUSE of the stellar line up that those unable to attend were hoping for a livestream. And not sure why you are bringing up MoShow. As a show choir judge and coach I have seen it all when it comes to in person shows and live streams. Throwing a question out regarding a day that will no doubt be fantastic is just that, a question. Who cares if people make burner accounts with bad comments? For those that want the opportunity to view people they know who are performing, they are appreciative.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, I’m not against livestreams. All I want is for people to understand that there are a variety of reasons why a contest may not be livestreamed, and to be okay if a contest is not livestreamed. However, your previous post (“I am confused…”) seems to demonstrate a lack of understanding for this concept. I agree that they are useful, and that many people are appreciative towards them. But it is in no way, shape, or form a requirement to have one. It’s fine to be disappointed, but please don’t question the host school’s choices and/or circumstances.
Great to hear. It is a huge event that will be amazing and it is a bummer it won't be live streamed. I'm not the only person who would have loved to see it streamed. Expressing disappointment in that aspect does not slight the competition. I never questioned the school's decision or choices. I asked a question which was answered by the school. I commiserated with someone else who had hoped for a live stream. I did not say I was confused in any of my posts. I said I was surprised. Please do not put words into my moutb and imply otherwise.
You said "confused", and then retroactively edited the post to "surprised". I apologize that I misinterpreted your words, although I was not putting words in your mouth when they were *a part of the post until you edited it*.
Yeah, no I didn't. I edited the post to put in the word awesome 4 hours ago. But whatever. You do you. I'm not going to argue with someone who wants to hijack other people's valid questions and discussions for the sake of arguing. The question had been asked, answered and politely discussed before your entrance into the conversation. Moving on.
So now you're just going to lie, straight up? I see why Twitter is still holding out against editable tweets I made sure to double check your exact wording so that I could correctly attribute a quote to ensure accuracy and move the conversation forward. Clearly, I failed to do that. However, I hope one day I get to the point where I have "seen it all" like you. Best regards.
I am just now catching up on this thread. "Sing4me" is listed as affiliated with CR Washington. I don't know who Stacie Eastman is, but they do not work within the program. Therefore, they did not understand why MoShow was brought into the conversation. I don't even believe MoShow had a live stream last year, so anyway, this seems to be a slight trolling situation.
I just wanted to clarify all that as I was bored on a Tuesday and looking at last year's results.
GC - ankeny VA (BV, BC, BB)
1RU - waukee nw eos
2RU - SEP ramification
other finalists were gretna, west side delegation, waukee nw aurora, and des moines christian. they started announcing final results at 2RU so i couldn’t catch everyone else’s results unfortunately
I made sure to double check your exact wording so that I could correctly attribute a quote to ensure accuracy and move the conversation forward. Clearly, I failed to do that. However, I hope one day I get to the point where I have "seen it all" like you. Best regards.
