The Eurovision Song Contest Thread

GBF · May 2016

You are not correct. I am sorry, but Polina would have been second with regard to televotes and juries last year. No matter which concept you apply. Even with the new system, she would have been second with the juries. However she would have been third under the new system in total.

There is a simple reason why Ukrainian televoters gave 12 points to Russia and why Russian televoters gave 10 points to Ukraine. Ukrains are amongst the biggest minorities in Russia and Russians still represent the biggest minority in Ukraine. Russia by the way has always won the televotes in Ukraine or got 10 points from them. This signals that their diaspora in the Ukraine is very active. Televoters were not objective but gave votes mainly to their mother countries. And please tell me why should the Armenian jury give Russia only 2 points? Armenia is one of Russia's best friends and highly dependant on Russia. Why can't people not accept that musicians and music professionals vote different from the masses, especially if the masses are very much affected by diaspora.
But you just say that all juries are corrupt. There is no evidence that juries are affected. And btw Ukraine also received 0 points from 17 countries. Nobody complains about this. They also did way better with the televoters but finally they had the best combination of televotes and jury votes.

BondJasonBond006 · May 2016

I accept the result under the current rules of course and as I have said the Ukraine is even my favourite ESC country with all of its songs being amongst my all time favourites except 2005 and 2016.

But I will fight for the juries to be abandoned and having televote only till my last breath.
I can accept a result of millions of votes which is 1000 times more representative than the vote of 40 juries (200 people).

Thunderfinger · May 2016

Before the juries halfway returned, Germany always gave Turkey 12 points. It was ridiculous.

BondJasonBond006 · May 2016

So let's celebrate the Ukraine for its great accomplishment and contribution to the ESC. Without that country the ESC wouldn't be the same.

Here are some of the entries of the Ukraine since 2004.

First Ruslana who has won the ESC in 2004, still pretty much unrivalled.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/10XR67NQcAc"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

One of the most loved acts ever of the ESC, a true icon and always present in some form, this year as well in the fabulous taxi segments with Petra Mede.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/hfjHJneVonE"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

One of my most favourite ESC songs ever, the brilliant Alyosha.

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/NQ2mAuqnXZk"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Another brilliant entry:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/BMxpv8naRd8"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

This is why I love the ESC, Ukraine women are HOT HOT HOT HOT

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/L6M300uBc7U"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Another one of my favourites from the Ukraine:

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/mRqhkwTIuU8"; frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Thunderfinger · May 2016

I wonder if Russia will even participate next year, if the EU backed nazi regime there is still in place?

And I do wish Verka will be there.

Gustav_Graves · June 2016

I wrote an extensive post mortem on my Dutch language Eurovision blog Songfestivalwerk:
https://songfestivalwerk.wordpress.com/2016/05/27/gerts-blog-■-was-editie-2016-onnodig-controversieel/

This is a rough English transcript from my piece translated by Google Translate. Try to read through some obvious grammatical mistakes. I am curious what you think of it:

Since the first edition in 1956 in Lugano, Switzerland, Eurovision shows a reflection of geopolitical events. These political events are often, but not always, beyond the participating songs and their lyrics. In one Eurovision edition was geopolitics to detect barely, but other editions that led sometimes to heated controversies. A good example is the Eurovision Song Contest 1969 which was held in the Franco Spain. It was a thorn in the side of many European public broadcasters that the festival was held in the former dictatorship Spain. Several broadcasters allowed to protest their conductors at home. Fixed Metropole Orchestra conductor Dolf van der Linden called off and his place was taken by the French jazz conductor Cook. And one country withdrew in its entirety; Austria. ■ By: Gert Waterink ■

The 60s were a priori a controversial decade. The Cold War was raging fiercely (highlighted by the Cuban missile crisis and the Hungarian Uprising led by Imre Nagy), politicians were assassinated (John F. Kennedy, Malcolm X, Robert Kennedy, Martin Luther King), provo movements in the Western world made their advance (nonviolent 'provocation' by established authorities with the aim of anarchism) and the Vietnam war intensified violent (both under President Johnson and President Nixon). Under this political constellation so did the 1969 festival in Madrid instead. If then also by simple, clear but never properly revised scoring rules, four countries will be crowned the winner, makes of course even more problems. There followed a year later then also more boycotts. Portugal, Sweden, Norway and Finland withdrew. Prompt was in 1970 in Amsterdam, the newly formed Dutch broadcaster NOS task than just producing an interesting possible show with only 12 participating countries.

Scoring Contest 1969 Het first contest was held as mentioned in 1956 and that already took place in the Cold War. It is plausible to think that as the former Soviet states Czechoslovakia, East Germany and Hungary would be awarded by the EBU for the Eurovision participation, the Eurovision Song Contest might not have been more viable long.

Why this piece of historical perspective? Because the 61st Eurovision Song Contest might know the same kind of problems then the festivals of 1969 and in Madrid in 1970 in Amsterdam. The big difference is perhaps that external political events and have become its conflicts and problems slowly and stealthily part of the current Eurovision Song Contest (think of the situation in Russia). And that is a reality that will have to process the European Broadcasting Union better for the next year. Because the run-up to the 61st contest brought many incidents with him and showed that in this area a lot needs to be improved.

Flag Flag Incident Policy and 'Romania-gate'
Thus, the EBU brought this year for the first time a so-called flag policy 'out. In itself it is very noble idea. And it showed that the EBU the "politicization" of the contest was high on the agenda. But the way this was brought out was unnecessarily amateurish. The Basque political party EH Bildu took his complaint to the Swedish Embassy, as the flag of the Basque Country in the instruction flag was depicted above the flag of the Islamic State. Very inconvenient and a scandal was born. Changes were made to the flag instruction, but the news was already picked up by the Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine. Which saw the banning of the flag of Crimea aid to Russia. In the Netherlands touched the LGBT advocacy organization COC itself because it not too much if fluttering rainbow flag in Stockholm at times.

Regardless of how the "flag incident" began in late April, may safely be concluded that the EBU has underestimated the current geopolitical climate and its possible implications gross. It did not matter if the flag instructions were leaked or that they would be published neatly at a much earlier time. Collecting non-accredited flags on a piece of paper you create irrevocable sensitive issues within regional minorities and unrecognized countries. How noble the original purpose of the EBU than may be, the contrary is the reality and unnecessary political controversy, which would prevent you so shortly before the start of the festival, was born.

The same we saw happen with the very late disqualification of Romania in the 61st Eurovision Song Contest. The EBU arguments were absolutely convincing. And behind the scenes, the EBU repeatedly attempted to force the Romanian broadcaster TVR to sail with paying mandatory membership fees. And yet, if the media anti-EBU feeling is generated which Romania appears to have the full support of the fan community, then you do in media communication and in its timing wrong.

Too amateurish approach to judging
Same naivety and carelessness we saw this year back in the judging. The Russian judge Anastasia Stotskaya was so eager to progress its adjudication for the first semifinal disclose via Periscope. Mainly its opinion on the Dutch and Armenian entry came early out. But that was not all. Her notes and web stream of the jury-finals were filmed by her. Fortunately the EBU took this seriously and it was decided to remove Mrs. Stotskaya from the five-member jury.

Russian jury is still here too much wrong prior to the establishment of the national juries. What bothered me still the most was the nonchalant way of judging (ie unprofessional). Mrs. Stotskaya looked around to sit a sort of kitchen table with her fellow colleagues, without there even was some scrutiny of a jury president (in the current jury system is the 5th meestemmende juror as well as the jury president). There was also a hindrance image going back and forth by the jurors during the jury-finals. And while I was always under the assumption that juries neatly in a sealed TV studio remained seated and that juries were chaired by a severe miss the broadcaster. If the EBU pretends that it has listed the juries in high standard and also allows, through the press spokesman to know to be "proud" of the professionalism of the judges agreed, then jury scandals above may simply not happen.

Apart from these 'juryleaks "there are also a lot of choices in the creation of a jury to say the least are dubious. So took the 17-year-old (!!) Lisa Ajax sitting in the Swedish jury. She has a recording contract with Capitol Records, as the composers and producers of the Azerbaijani entry Miracle. Also Lisa's resident choreographer Zain Odelstål was on stage with Samra Azerbaijan. Or for that reason Lisa Ajax Azerbaijan has finally put on the 1st place you can never make 100% hard. But it should be clear that the EBU does not attempt in this way to proactively prevent the appearance of bias. 'Professionalism' is a rather hollow concept in this way. The esteem of the jury system is also rapidly lowered.
Picture - Proposal Professionalization Jury System

The new scoring presentation
In terms of excitement, the EBU than put good steps with the scoring. If we get away scoring aside all the geopolitical problems and Eurovision scandals, the new Melodifestivalen system was indeed exciting. Until the last two sets televoting points Europe did not know who was going to win. I am therefore also to bring back the system next year to Kiev.

But the system also has disadvantages. So the jury choices immediately all those millions of tangled contest Lay fired. Especially in Eastern Europe juries you see here surfacing the 'friend' between Belarus and Russia. And indeed, as came the Swedish 10 points for Azerbaijan, co-created by Lisa Ajax, to put it mildly, rather strange.

The EBU does have early this year indeed published an extensive video showing the new scoring system was explained in a clear, but also somewhat nonchalant and playful way. A seasoned Eurovision nerd like myself was of course eager to this applied in practice to see. The most exciting scenarios already rolled through my head. And they came from.

Looking back on my own enthusiasm and the enthusiasm of the film, is also again shows that the EBU has given too little account of certain scenarios that sometimes might fall ill. So it may well be possible that the final winner of the Eurovision Song Contest is not the winner of the juries (as in 2011 the case was with the Azerbaijani profits) or not, the winner is the voting public (as in 2015 case was with the Swedish profit). And this year has shown that the entire profit also two 2nd places in both the juries and the televoters suffice.

Of course there must be looked at on an empty way for this kind of results. What is unquestionable is still the simple fact that you have to score very well with both juries and telephone voters you want to seriously claim the trophy.

Better communication is a must
But let it just be the big issue for the contest in the year 2016. The EBU seems too often underestimate their own success now to Olympic size swollen contest. Such underestimation seems more painful to be visible as far as national interests are at stake. In light of the current political developments in Europe, and in particular the situations in Ukraine and Russia, the EBU will in its media communications policy more clearly, must anticipate firmer and clearer in these events and the world outside Eurovision.

Heeft EBU example, earlier this year sent a sternly worded disclaimer to all 42 heads of delegation in which several "radical" scenarios results were discussed? The EBU lashed clear during the Head of Delegations meetings on both the Russian and Ukrainian delegations that an entry like "We Do not Want to Putin" (Georgia 2009) had to be disqualified in accordance with the existing rules and "1944" (Ukraine 2016 ) not?

Of course, the EBU will argue that it is constantly working behind the scenes to clearly communicate all changes. And maybe I'm in some areas less than what is currently performing the EBU. I will be honest that I can handle themselves well and collect all the changes and incidents. I'm sober and rational enough. And let it be clear that I sentiment with the EBU part politicization should be reduced and that the professionalization of the TV show, was found by the introduction of a jury system and a new scoring presentation, absolutely passage.

Image - Rating Points Tellinger look in the year 2016 alone more people to the Eurovision Song Contest (204 million). And these are no longer just enlightened minds that the heart with respect to the contest are sitting in the right place. And many other viewers shall also agree that some changes were going too quickly. Noise and confusion than is part of public opinion and social media. The figure at right shows this somewhat (the radical and hurtful comments I but not included).

Controversial TOP 3
Especially this year which, unlike in previous years, the entire TOP 3 could count on strong criticism (even Australia managed to along with BBC commentator Graham Norton), the European Broadcasting Union stabbing significant drop in communicative terms. Europe is experiencing one of the most difficult political news around since the 60s. The refugee crisis in continental Europe is still going on, the financial (European) crisis in southern Europe is still not exorcised, Donetsk and Crimea are still thousands of deaths and a potential 'Brexit "is still not averted. 'Building Bridges' is then even more difficult in a society where social media on an almost scary way is intertwined with our daily lives.

eurovision-2017-ukraineMet this reality, the EBU will have even stricter conduct the contest in Kiev. Thus, the judging will be tighter and more professional should be organized. The credibility of the competition is indeed at stake. And media communication a top priority should be. Only then will a boycott of Russia might be averted next year. This would also help if the EBU further analyzes the festivals in 1969 in Franco Spain and in 1970 in Amsterdam. A replay of events from that time, or a superlative of the controversies of that time, the stunning Eurovision Song Contest can just use this time.

GBF · June 2016

Gustav_Graves wrote: »

I wrote an extensive post mortem on my Dutch language Eurovision blog Songfestivalwerk:
https://songfestivalwerk.wordpress.com/2016/05/27/gerts-blog-■-was-editie-2016-onnodig-controversieel/

[/quote]

This is a very interesting report on the ESC 2016 with links to earlier contest. I think I can agree on all the comments you made, especially with regard to the EBU and the jury performance. With regard to the juries there is probably also one aspect that should be debated. I recognised that they really prefer the songs that they already had to judge in their respective semi final. In the Grand Final ALL!! 20 qualifyers received the majority points from the juries of their semi final. For many countries the difference is not even small. For example, Russia received on average only 1 point from the juries of Semi final 2 but 4,75 from the juries from Semi final 2. With regard to Belgium it is the other way around. The interesting thing is that for the 6 automatic qualifyers there is not such a clear picture. 3 of them received more points from the juries of the semi final where they were shortly introduced whereas the other 3 received more points by the juries of the respective other semi final.

I have calculated the results in an Excel sheet. The results are really surprising to me that the picture is so evident. At least for the ESC 2016 it is really clear that Juries are really biased towards the songs they already know and which they had already judged.This may at least explain a little bit why the automatic qualifyers do not do so very good in the finals, if they have no chance to impress a jury in an earlier voting. Maybe one should consider that the jury members should be changed after the semi finals to allow for a level playing field or the automatic qualifyers should be also allowed to perform their song in the Semi finals.

BondJasonBond006 · June 2016

Very good analysis both of you.
It is my believe that you can analyse as much as possible and the main problem will not go away. The juries.
I think even the EBU now has realised that they are endangering the ESC. The opposition against juries has grown considerably since 2015.
How they can go on like this I don't know.
No matter the good intentions they had re introducing juries, it is now clear it was a mistake. Juries are way more biased than tele voters and juries play political and tactical games.
Also the juries got exposed this year with the new presentation of the votes.
That transparency finally made a majority of viewers learn how the juries work, that was not to the advantage to the juries image.
Personally I know no one who was happy with the overall result.

M_Balje · June 2016

http://www.nu.nl/muziek/4271984/songfestival-winnares-corry-brokken-83-overleden.html
Corry Brokken passing a way on the age of 83 years old. She was first Dutch winner in 1957 at the 2nd year of songcontest. The Netherlands only won two times.

Winning son ''Net als Toen'' (Like it used to be) from her in 1957.

Rip (3 December 1932 – 2 June 2016)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corry_Brokken

Gerard · June 2016

Netherlands won four times, not twice : in 1957 with Corry Brokken, 1959 with Teddy Scholten and "Een Beetje", in the infamous 1969 contest with Lenny Kuhr and "De Troubadour", and 1975 with Teach In and "Ding-a-Dong".

Gustav_Graves · February 2017

It starts again guys ;-)! Let's change the topic into:

"62nd Eurovision Song Contest, Kyiv, Ukraine (9th, 11th & 13th May, 2017)"

In the meantime, five of the 43 countries participating in this year's contest have chosen their songs, including Finland and the UK.

Have a listen ;-):

UK (my rating: 3 out of 5 stars. It's OK, especially vocally):

Finland (my rating: 4.5 out of 5 stars! Wonderful entry! TOP 10 candidate):

RogueAgent · February 2017

Oh no!!! Not that time of year again?!!! %-( :))

jobo · February 2017

RogueAgent wrote: »

Oh no!!! Not that time of year again?!!! %-( :))

I was thinking the same thing ;))

Thunderfinger · February 2017

Those two entries above are horrible.

j_w_pepper · February 2017

I'm amazed to find this thread popping up. Well, I guess one shouldn't be criticising one's place of refuge.

Do you also have a discussion about the likes of "I’m a Celebrity … Get Me Out of Here!"?

Thunderfinger · February 2017

Yes, but I am the only celebrity here, so there wasn t much discussion.

j_w_pepper · February 2017

Thunderfinger wrote: »

Yes, but I am the only celebrity here, so there wasn t much discussion.

Anyway, appropriate here, since eating kangaroo testicles and maggots is probably the lesser evil compared to watching the ESC.

DarthDimi · February 2017

I changed the thread's title, @Gustav_Graves.

On a personal note, I hate the Eurovision songcontest. It's not a symbol of a unified Europe; instead, it's a commercially exploited event with a bunch of clowns on a stage performing songs which, for the most part, are horrendous. People talk about that show like it means something. It doesn't. It's a laughable, expensive waste of time that for the most part stresses how different we are, not how unified we are. Every time I hear one of those Eastern European songs for example, I wonder if the singers realise this isn't 1905 anymore. I hate to be "song-ist", but all those Eurovision songs sound the same to me. It's the same crap every year.

And to the UK, I say this: make up your mind. You want out? Then stay out.

I'll be glad if this annual comedy will be over again and may it never be organised again. The money they spend on this thing can no doubt the used a lot better.

Mrcoggins · February 2017

As will I good riddance to it .

Gustav_Graves · February 2017

DarthDimi wrote: »

I changed the thread's title, @Gustav_Graves.

On a personal note, I hate the Eurovision songcontest. It's not a symbol of a unified Europe; instead, it's a commercially exploited event with a bunch of clowns on a stage performing songs which, for the most part, are horrendous. People talk about that show like it means something. It doesn't. It's a laughable, expensive waste of time that for the most part stresses how different we are, not how unified we are. Every time I hear one of those Eastern European songs for example, I wonder if the singers realise this isn't 1905 anymore. I hate to be "song-ist", but all those Eurovision songs sound the same to me. It's the same crap every year.

And to the UK, I say this: make up your mind. You want out? Then stay out.

I'll be glad if this annual comedy will be over again and may it never be organised again. The money they spend on this thing can no doubt the used a lot better.

:-O :((

Dragonpol · February 2017

Oh Lord preserve us!

MajorDSmythe · February 2017

It's mostly a steaming pile of camp, and yes, i'm going to say it, those eastern european countries all stick together. Given our track record over the years, recent political events can't tarnish the UK's legacy much. Hopefully, this is be our last year.

Gustav_Graves · February 2017

MajorDSmythe wrote: »

It's mostly a steaming pile of camp, and yes, i'm going to say it, those eastern european countries all stick together. Given our track record over the years, recent political events can't tarnish the UK's legacy much. Hopefully, this is be our last year.

It's not true :-(. I mean, I think I've posted in here already enough examples of very good songs.

DarthDimi · February 2017

Very subjective, of course. ;-) Look, my parents forced me to watch that crap ages ago. I guess Nocturne by Secret Garden or whatever is a great song. And then there's Johnny Logan. But in the past 20 or so years, I can't think of a single song that I deem good or even passable.

Gustav_Graves · February 2017

DarthDimi wrote: »

Very subjective, of course. ;-) Look, my parents forced me to watch that crap ages ago. I guess Nocturne by Secret Garden or whatever is a great song. And then there's Johnny Logan. But in the past 20 or so years, I can't think of a single song that I deem good or even passable.

Have you actually watched the Finnish entry for this year ;-)?

DarthDimi · February 2017

Not yet and it'll only happen by accident or not. ;-)

Gustav_Graves · February 2017

DarthDimi wrote: »

Not yet and it'll only happen by accident or not. ;-)

First: Listen and watch. Second: Pass over your judgement. Not the other way around. Like Donald Trump is doing >:)

DarthDimi · February 2017

Off topic: Kevin Smith suggested Trump to play Jabba the Hutt. Would save the make-up department some money.

MajorDSmythe · February 2017

Gustav_Graves wrote: »

MajorDSmythe wrote: »

It's mostly a steaming pile of camp, and yes, i'm going to say it, those eastern european countries all stick together. Given our track record over the years, recent political events can't tarnish the UK's legacy much. Hopefully, this is be our last year.

It's not true :-(. I mean, I think I've posted in here already enough examples of very good songs.

I'm not saying that other people can't watch and enjoy it. I'm saying that I don't. I know Bucks Fizz was our entry one year, Bonnie Tyler more recently, I think Katrina And The Waves was also an entry of ours. Don't ask me about the songs, though, I have no idea.

Hang on, wasn't Gina G: Just A Little Bit our entry for one year? So that's the only one, both singer and song, that I can name.

Mrcoggins · February 2017

Hopefully this time round will be our last if not what's another year !. %-(

Reporting For Duty

Categories

In this Discussion

The Eurovision Song Contest Thread

Comments

Reporting For Duty

Quick Links

Categories

In this Discussion

The Eurovision Song Contest Thread

Comments