•   days until the Eurovision Song Contest Final in Turin!
0

Jury and Televoting split

  1. Jonny Ginger Tory Witch

    This is essentially what I've been trying to put into words for the past couple of years. What the public think is what genuinely matters as Eurovision needs good viewing figures to survive. Consequently, whether or not the contest is actually fairer as a result of juries is meaningless really.
    NickEmpel likes this.
  2. Mina Member with a "past"

    It's not something against Italy. Personally I expected Italy to do well with the juries..but I was shocked to see how many points it got from them! Sure, it was a nice song (for its genre) and he sang well (we can't really talk about performance when all he did was sit at a piano and sing..he might as well have been in a radio show, he barely even looked at the camera)....but almost double points from the runner up???

    The way I see it, by voting massively for a song like that is like they're sending a message 'whatever you do, we'll still vote for the same old fashioned thing we would vote 30 yrs ago'. And I find very strange, at the very least, that all the juries (apparently) agreed that this song deserved so many points...did ALL of them love jazz so much?
  3. Mina Member with a "past"

    By public, I suppose you mean from western countries. In that case sure, if the west consider the combined results fairer than the televoting results, sure, it's worth it. Who cares about the rest of Europe..right? :P
  4. Mina Member with a "past"

    LOL, I just saw this post. I'm in touch with my inner child but in reality I'm old enough to remember juries :P
  5. Jonny Ginger Tory Witch

    Not really, separating Europe into East and West in this context is rather irrelevant. Results that appear fairer doesn't mean results that favour the West, it means results that aren't so obvious on the night i.e Belarus not giving Russia 12 every year, Spain not giving Romania 12 every year etc. Whether this affects the East or the West isn't really important here.
  6. NickEmpel BURGER AND FRIES

    Double points = overcooking. The gap was 69 points. Azerbaijan received 182 from juries, Italy 251. I do NOT see a 'double' point thing, not even close.

    Absolutely true there Jonny. Just looking to my own country as an example. In 2005-2007, the media here were furious when we didn't qualify: 'Easternvision! Diaspora! No one likes us!'
    Now when the juries stepped in, the reactions changed to: 'If juries don't like it, well, what can we do? Let's try again next year.'
    Just looking at THAT convinces me to support the juries 100%!

    Exactly. Best example this year was by far the United Kingdom. Seeing their performance on Saturday night, which gave them a 5th place among televote, compared to the 22nd place with juries, makes me think something went wrong on one of the nights. And surprise, surprise: Blue screwed their jury rehearsal. Logically, juries hear those vocals, hence why they vote less for that song.
    Regarding Azerbaijan winning: nothing wrong with it. From the moment it was released, we knew they wanted to play 'safe' in Düsseldorf. And Denmark being drawn early, Sweden not a jury song and Italy not a televote song, made Azerbaijan the only right winner for Eurovision 2011. They did nothing wrong. A good performance, a decent song and a good position in the draw.
  7. Mina Member with a "past"

    Jonny, I didn't mean it that way. I meant that still, the 'jury thing' has more western supporters.

    I'm sure that (maybe not this year, maybe not next but in a few years) they will realise that when they did do badly, no, it wasn't the evil televoting that did it, it was the songs they sent. France, Spain and the Uk have already gotten a taste of that...especially Spain, who, for 2 yrs in a row did much better with the public than with juries..I'm sure Germany and Italy will follow...just give the big 5 4-5 years before they start screaming 'let's go back to televoting'. I'm 100% sure ^_^
  8. Jonny Ginger Tory Witch

    Well of course it has more Western supporters, as it benefits more Western countries in the sense it partially takes away a pre-existing Eastern advantage.

    I can't see Western broadcasters supporting a return to televoting to be honest. Even if some want to do well, viewing figures matter more and in Western countries the public overwhelmingly favour partial jury voting, so getting rid of juries would just be asking for lower viewing figures and more negative press. Even our media focus less on political voting nowadays, even this year with Azerbaijan winning :cool:.

    Also as Nick has already pointed out, if we do badly because of juries the reaction isn't "THOSE EVIL JURIES HOW DARE THEY ROB US OF WHAT IS RIGHTFULLY OURS!!11!!!!!!one!!!!", it's more "Fair enough, let's try again next year", so there's really no incentive for Western broadcasters to get rid of juries.
  9. Mina Member with a "past"

    Of course not...not yet. Because most western viewers are either a/too young and still believe that juries are fair and vote 'objectively' because they don't know better or b/old enough to remember the good old days when they did better (forgetting ofcourse that the countries were much less than today so, naturally, it was easier to make a top 10).
    Of course your media focuses much less on political voting..when the Uk is higher in televoting than Russia, and at the same time Ireland is in the top 10, Germany is in the top 10, a western country won both last year, etc...not much they can say, is there?
    And I bet that Terry Wogan has shut up as well..which is the only good thing about the return of the juries.
  10. Jonny Ginger Tory Witch

    In essence you've just said that our viewership comprises old people and young people, both of which have positive images of the juries? :P Well yeah that was my point. Whether or not these positive images are justified is totally irrelevant, but it's the fact that they are positive which is important.

    I think this is a terribly simplistic way of looking at things. You also have to consider the public opinion (the newspapers are only going to print a viewpoint if it's popular and the "Eurovision is entirely political" viewpoint is really quite old now).

    This year, regardless of who was in the top 10 or where the UK finished, would have been the perfect year to spin that viewpoint. Azerbaijan won, and half the British population don't even know where Azerbaijan is, and the other half probably don't think it should be in Eurovision because it's in Asia, so it's the perfect winner to use the "Eurovision is a fix" viewpoint with, yet they didn't. Why? Because that's not the general consensus anymore. It's very hard for anybody to say "Eurovision is a fix" without somebody going "But 50% of it is decided by juries", so people don't see the contest in the same way they did pre-08. In a way I suppose you could say Eurovision has gained credibility since then.

    I've probably explained it badly but living here, I can totally understand why the EBU wants juries back in the contest.
  11. NickEmpel BURGER AND FRIES

    This is in my opinion a DISGUSTING comment. I'm sorry for saying, but you always tend to discriminate people on age. People are, in your eyes, always too young or too old.
    In my opinion, age has absolutely nothing to do with a view on juries.
    And basically, you have just put your own arguments completely off-side. They make no sense anymore, you clearly say that juries affect everyone positively, except for yourself?
  12. Merjan MICHAEL GOVE FOR PM


    But if you just look at the positions, Nick, Italy were 11th (still "up there") with the televoters and 1st with the juries, whereas Russia (and I have no axe to grind either for or against the Russian song, which I found to be quite unremarkable, were 8th with the televoters and last with the juries. I do find that quite strange. (I certainly wouldn't have put him last.) Of course, we don't know (or at least I don't) how their performances differed on both nights. I still think that is totally wrong. The juries should vote on the same performance that we see.

    It seems to me that we are going down the route of getting "safe" winners - songs that are (just) OK, that can appeal across the board (as this year and last) - things that the fewest people find offensive (meant in its loosest term) rather than anything that is really different or that stands out.

    And yes, I am old, maybe that's why I liked Italy, if Mina is to have her way, but I also liked Austria, Sweden, Turkey... which were probably aimed at "young" people. I have absolutely no idea of the ages of any of the juries (I did read who the UK jury consisted of, but I can't remember, can't find it again, and I'm not sure I'd even heard of any of them so I can't comment on their ages) but if the viewing figures are upwards of 200 million, then surely there has to be a spread of ages, or is it being suggested that only people under a certain age are to be allowed to vote?
  13. Merjan MICHAEL GOVE FOR PM

    Well, is that half the problem? It is, after all, a song contest. If someone totally stuffs up their vocals (as Amaury did for France) it's bound to have an effect on the televoters (and, from what we have seen, certainly about Blue's results, possibly the juries) but does (or should) the fact that people are dressed as gnomes/ dancing round the stage/ whipping their dresses off/ breaking panes of glass, etc make a difference? Not everyone watches the show. Some people only listen; they only have the song itself to go on. Whether Raphael Gulazzi was sitting at a piano or tightrope walking across flaming coals should have nothing to do with it. From his style of song, there wasn't a great deal of "performing" he could do; it would have been quite incongruous with the song. If Moldova had been wearing "normal" clothes, would they not have received such scathing comments? (Of course, we don't know.) What did people who only heard the song think of it? (As it was quite middling with both the televoters and the juries.)

    Italy was a pleasant song and, as I've said elsewhere, I think we are moving towards having inoffensive songs win, because they are the least worst for the largest number of people (of all ages). I think the eastern countries' entries are becoming much less eastern in nature (something I personally prefer) but I know of people who think each country's entry should really be representative of its own culture, but it seems it is all becoming much more homogenous, for better or for worse.
  14. Mina Member with a "past"

    As usual, you take things I say the wrong way. But, you can keep on believing that you know everything at 16..I was the same at ur age..lol
  15. NickEmpel BURGER AND FRIES

    Once again you bring in age. I never pretended to know everything. But if you seriously feel that I can't mix in with your discussion, then say so. If that is the case, what should I do? If I cannot participate in discussions, why am I here?...
  16. Mina Member with a "past"

    Nick, surely you can understand that 2 people with different experiences may have different views, too. It wasn't about age as in 'you're too young to judge' but as in my experience with eurovision was WITH juries for many years...yours, on the other hand was with televoting..so, it would be impossible for you to know the disappointments someone has gone through because you haven't lived it. You haven't been around when every year since I was 10 I was cursing Greek juries for their votes because they voted in an old fashioned way or European juries because they ignored great songs for reasons I couldn't understand..or when rumours were flying all around Europe and among fans that juries were corrupt and bought.
    It's different to read about or even watch older contests and living at the time they happened and watching them live. You'll see that for yourself when you're 30 or 40 and you talk about older contests with someone younger...the problem won't be age, the problem will be different experience on the matter.
    When in 10 years you tell someone who was born in 2009, for example, that 100% televoting had many flaws and people hated it etc, you'll understand my position better. Because he will be as people were in 1998, when we (and EBU) hoped that televoting would solve everything...and it did solve many issues...but created others but that's another discussion :P

    PS Noone said you can't participate in discussions, that was a silly thing to say:devil:

Like this page on Facebook




Comments posted on the forum and in the chat room are the sole opinion of the respective author and not escChat.com.
escChat.com © 2009 – 2022