AHC/WI: World's Fairs More Prominent Than the Olympics

Delta Force

Banned
World's fairs existed well before the Modern Olympic Games and were the site of many important events in history. For example, the 1893 World's Fair in Chicago demonstrated the utility of electric lighting. President McKinley was assassinated at the 1901 World's Fair in Buffalo. The 1907 World's Fair in Hampton Roads brought the area's maritime importance to prominence again for the first time since the American Civil War, and the Exposition grounds were later developed into Naval Station Norfolk. Other prominent World's Fairs include the 1939 World's Fair in New York City (which was the first to focus on the future and coined the term Futurama), 1962 World's Fair in Seattle (which the Space Needle was built for), 1964/1965 World's Fair in New York City (considered a showcase of the Space Age), and 1967 Montreal World's Fairs (the most successful of the 20th century World's Fairs).

After the 1960s the World's Fairs declined in prominence, and while they continue to be held they are no where near competitive with the Olympics. It seems that the World's Fair concept has more in favor of it than the Olympics though. World's Fairs can be about whatever people want, although they tend to be showcases of science, culture, technology, and consumerism. A country doesn't have to build grand sports complexes that will only be used once in order to host a World's Fair. Is there any way for the World's Fair concept to continue beyond the 1960s in prominence, eventually overtaking the Olympics as the premier international event?
 
I think sports will always have a bigger public appeal than intellectual gatherings, even ones, like the World's Fair, focused on crowd-pleasing topics like technology and the future. Even if, for example, they set up a weeklong, mega Ted Lecture series each year in the US, it still wouldn't be as big as the Super Bowl.

And, speaking as a total non-fan of sports, I can still name more people and events associated with the Olympics than with any World's Fair, including Vancouver '86, which I attended(all I can remember are a couple of pavillions, ie. the crappy Canadian one with a Disney-produced promo film, and the USSR one, with impenetrable books by Lenin on sale).
 
This is an interesting question.

The best POD for this is to simply have no Olympics, which I posited as a WI in the pre-1900 forum last week. There was nothing pre-ordained about the Olympics.

The more interesting question is what killed interest in big World Fairs after Montreal in 1976 (I still have the guidebook for that one)? I can see three possible arguments:

1. Disney constructed a sort of permanent World's Fair at EPCOT in Orlando. Really, EPCOT does all the stuff the old Worlds Fairs used to do, so if you want the experience, you can just go to EPCOT.

2. We are being deluged by too much information due to the internets and multiple cable channels, so you don't have to go to Worlds Fair to see the latest advances in technology.

3. The main purpose of these things was to show off advances in technology. Starting in about 1969, the pace of technological progress really slowed compared to what it had been for the previous century. People dispute this, but its supported by things like the annual number of patents granted. People don't want to go to a World Fair to celebrate how much more effectively the government can put them under surveillance (Communist block nations never did World Fairs).

I suspect the main answer is # 3, so the POD has to be pretty severe for this.
 
Here's an idea...

Make the Fairs competitive, ie. award prizes in various categories to the pavillions. This'll get some international rivalry going, and bring a lot more media attention to what each country is doing. And it would almost certainly usher in more "opportunities" for corruption and attendant scandals.

Mind you, I don't know if that would be enough to overcome public apathy. Lots of lower-tier sporing events(eg. the Rugby World Cup) are competitive, but they don't get the kind of attention that the Olympics do. Though maybe if the Worlds Fair is really pitched as WHICH MATION HAS THE COOLEST STUFF?, it might generate the neccessary excitement.
 

Delta Force

Banned
I think sports will always have a bigger public appeal than intellectual gatherings, even ones, like the World's Fair, focused on crowd-pleasing topics like technology and the future. Even if, for example, they set up a weeklong, mega Ted Lecture series each year in the US, it still wouldn't be as big as the Super Bowl.

And, speaking as a total non-fan of sports, I can still name more people and events associated with the Olympics than with any World's Fair, including Vancouver '86, which I attended(all I can remember are a couple of pavillions, ie. the crappy Canadian one with a Disney-produced promo film, and the USSR one, with impenetrable books by Lenin on sale).

The Soviet Union and other communist countries have always been big on showcasing technological advancements. Maybe they could establish a kind of permanent communist World's Fair akin to EPCOT, and then arrange to send their citizens there every year for part of their vacation. It could be a good mix of entertainment and propaganda.

This is an interesting question.

The best POD for this is to simply have no Olympics, which I posited as a WI in the pre-1900 forum last week. There was nothing pre-ordained about the Olympics.

The more interesting question is what killed interest in big World Fairs after Montreal in 1976 (I still have the guidebook for that one)? I can see three possible arguments:

1. Disney constructed a sort of permanent World's Fair at EPCOT in Orlando. Really, EPCOT does all the stuff the old Worlds Fairs used to do, so if you want the experience, you can just go to EPCOT.

2. We are being deluged by too much information due to the internets and multiple cable channels, so you don't have to go to Worlds Fair to see the latest advances in technology.

3. The main purpose of these things was to show off advances in technology. Starting in about 1969, the pace of technological progress really slowed compared to what it had been for the previous century. People dispute this, but its supported by things like the annual number of patents granted. People don't want to go to a World Fair to celebrate how much more effectively the government can put them under surveillance (Communist block nations never did World Fairs).

I suspect the main answer is # 3, so the POD has to be pretty severe for this.

Here's an idea...

Make the Fairs competitive, ie. award prizes in various categories to the pavillions. This'll get some international rivalry going, and bring a lot more media attention to what each country is doing. And it would almost certainly usher in more "opportunities" for corruption and attendant scandals.

Mind you, I don't know if that would be enough to overcome public apathy. Lots of lower-tier sporing events(eg. the Rugby World Cup) are competitive, but they don't get the kind of attention that the Olympics do. Though maybe if the Worlds Fair is really pitched as WHICH MATION HAS THE COOLEST STUFF?, it might generate the neccessary excitement.

Annual technology demonstrations still exist, they've just become spread out more. There are car shows, large commercial and military aerospace demonstrations, film festivals, video game shows, consumer good exhibitions, etc. A World's Fair could include elements of all of those. There would probably still be announcements and reveals at smaller events (or they even be smaller World's Fairs), but the big reveals would be at the World's Fairs with all of the attendees and media attention.
 
Top