As someone who has worked as a sub (copy-editor) in the UK for many years in the past I cannot begin to describe exactly how completely incorrect this is.

If you are going to write something like that you really should explain.

Well he said he can't begin to describe...

Have to agree - as a Brit, using 'help' there is just ... wrong

Not really. It's absolutely normal to see, for example, sports clubs and teams used as plural noun in the UK press; hence by extension it cann be used for any org. I know because it's a big gotcha for us Europeans, who tend to use the singular there.

British or American version?

That seems odd to me (as an American) because Apple is not plural, and often times when it is a group of people by identity you do use the plural for them (eg Americans help Asahi Linux). Would British folks say “England help Asahi Linux” as well?

No, they would not. Don't mistake erroneous colloquial speech for what's "correct" in written English. This is wrong, and so is the original example.

Yes, I believe that would be correct. Apple is plural in the sense that it is made up of multiple people acting in unison. Same as "My family are visiting over Christmas."

However, the word Americans is not a group of people in the same sense that USA, England, Apple, or family is. Its kind of like the distinction between people and persons.

Edit: the term for words like family is "collective noun". More at https://blog.harwardcommunications.com/2017/02/07/the-family...

Another American here. I never knew this. How common is this? Have I just assumed it’s a typo every time I see it? Or has (have?) the British media just become more Americanized like most places?

I am Canadian myself and generally follow the American style, but I believe it is very common, though not universal. Scanning The Guardian, they (!) seem to follow the American style, though this paragraph popped out at me where they use both:

> Labour [singular] takes comfort partly from the fact it expended little effort or money on the seat, allowing the Lib Dems [plural] to declare themselves in the best position to challenge the Tories.

But an American publication would probably write the same, because the name Lib Dems is itself pluralized.

"Labour" is a party name, and it is singular. "Liberal Democrats" is a party name, and it is plural. The verb is agreeing with the number of the noun, just as is usual in English.

I don't think that's the case; British English would say "X help Y" when X is a collective noun referring explicitly to a group of people, eg a football team ("Manchester United have scored"), or a band ("Radiohead are playing a concert today"). This means that "Spain (the country) is ..." but "Spain (the football team) are ...".

See here for details: https://editorsmanual.com/articles/collective-nouns-singular...

That's more or less what I said, except a lot more nuanced.

It's not that American English uses singular for groups of people. It's that American English sees Apple as a singular corporate entity.

British English peers past the corporate veil to see the singular corporation as it's underlying people.

American English generally uses singular for collective nouns. British English generally uses plural. There are exceptions (such as if the name itself is pluralised), but that's the general rule. Whether its "peering past the corporate veil" or not is neither here nor there, as they treat all collective nouns this way.

No. Singular nouns require singular verbs, in both countries.

Sure, but there is some disagreement across the pond on which nouns are singular.

Brits would be more likely to say “Led Zeppelin are on stage”, while Americans would prefer “Led Zeppelin is on stage”, and the reason is the disagreement between whether Led Zeppelin is singular (one band) or plural (4 people constituting the band.)

I wish you could provide some more details or substance so that I might know why your experiences contradict mine.