+MrMarconi Rus yes, the only solution to lower their corruptive power. With a 50% of the votes, there will be corruption and Eurovision should be a corruption free festival, especially if it's the tv audience that pay for each vote.
+Good Night Moon no matter how many people are in the jury....or even every jury member watching Eurovision in an isolated cabin without wifi so that they won't share their votes with the other members - they can always agree on their results beforehand. No matter if you have 5 jurors, 10 or 20. They can all stick together and say: Let's give 12 points to XXX and 0 or 1 point to XXX.
+Mitchel Rieger I forgot to mention. They could even agree on every member voting different but yet getting the desired result. That way it would look like a "normal" jury vote result. If you have 5 people, it's very easy to say: How do we have to vote in order to give XXX 12 points without having the same votes. So they agree that juror 1 gives 12 points, juror number 2 only 1 pointe, but jury 3 and 4 give 8 points and jury number 5 10 points. Result: 12 points from Azerbaijan go to XXX. And in order to harm the other favourites, they agree on different votes, low enough that the other favourites won't receive any points. It's corruption - made as easy as possible.
Guys you did an amazing job: the whole build up, 2 weeks in Stockholm and the final! Wiwi Blogs is the real winner here guys! Here is to next year, cheers from Scotland!
Wiwi team are just amazing. Watched each and single video posted during last 2 month. Great job guys. U r ahead 100 steps from your old fashion competitors (would not mention the name) & welcome to Ukraine! 🇺🇦💋
I thibnk the jury vote on Poland is completely unjustified. If a timeless ballad is popular and beloved by people of today it is current by proof. Also, Michael Szpak has a much more powerful voice and delivery than Frans. IMO the jury vote of Sweden so high was also unjustified.
I know I'm coming here years later but I not really see anything wrong with diaspora, what is wrong with Poland and the polish people backing their man. ( I'm not polish by the way.)
The televote and the juries are needed. I agree that there has to be stronger rules for the jurors but now that the new voting system doesn't punish jury-televoting discrepancies, I feel like it's more fair and a step in the right direction.
+mdcb91 I agree, but what rules? How can you control a juror's vote? 5 people sit in a room together and they combine their votes and Europe will only know once the contest is over? I mean it's a perfect system for corruption. The only way is lowering the jury's power, don't you think? Because you can't have a rule saying that it's not allowed that juror's have the same winner and 2nd place. I mean you can't control their taste, because within 5 people, it actually could happen that 2 or 3 of them have very similar results. So what does the EBU need to acuse them of fraud? I can't see any solution but a 25% jury vote only.
+Mitchel Rieger jurors should be isolated and maybe they could have more (from 5 to 7 or 10) and a prosecutor of some kind. Plus ok we take them to 25% so the audience has most of the power? that's not healthy, people can be even more biased than jurors. I think there's NO perfect system but this new system is good at balancing jurors and televoters.
+mdcb91 thanks for replying. Look, but even if jurors are isolated. If they agree beforehand to give Russia 0 points and Georgia 12 points. I mean... you can't control what they agreed on before. And I disagree that a whole nation is more biased than jurors. A country may give 12 points to their neighbour country, whether it deserves them or not, but at least you get the other points right. With corruption within a jury... they agree on the whole ranking. I can't remember the year, but it happened a few years ago I believe with the Azerbaijan vote, where they knew they were favourite and the 2nd favourite all the jury members they would place last in their vote. I mean come on!!!! But that strategy doesn't happen with the televote. For me it's worse that 5 people have 50% power and being corrupted than e.g. 3 million people voting and handing 12 points to their neighbour, but with a "common sense" 10, 8, 7, 6 points....
+Mitchel Rieger no problem, and that's a really valid argument, however what if only the "memorable" performances because of expensive antics or visual effects get points from the audience? Poorer countries with good performances will lose unless they are supported by jurors, let's not act like ALL jurors are corrupt, that's a bold assumption. Russia and Poland will always benefit from the audience votes bc of immigration, do you want them to win or place top 3 every year? We need a 50/50 balance in my opinion.
Mitchel Rieger: _"And I disagree that a whole nation is more biased than jurors. A country may give 12 points to their neighbour country, whether it deserves them or not, but at least you get the other points right."_ - No, you don't. The televote doesn't even reflect the preferences of the audience for every song. Every time someone votes, they do so for only one song, the top one according to them. Such vote is uninformative about they rank of all the other songs. On the other hand, it isn't just one country giving 12, 10 o 8 points to its neighbour (BTW, this has also always happened with the jury vote), it's half a countries voting for the same neighbour. That's the case with Russia. Which countries vote for Russia through televote? Those with large ethnic Russian minorities (former Soviet Republics), traditional allies (Serbia). Likewise with the ethnic minorities residing in the former Yugoslavia. Finally, there are the diasporas of Poles, Bulgarians, Romanians, Turkish, and countries with so small audiences whose preferences can be easily rigged (San Marino, Malta, Andorra, Montenegro, Iceland, Cyprus, Estonia).
+Антон Шаронов Hear them Calling and Icebreaker are both in my overall top fifteen. Denmark and Slovenia and Ireland, I can all understand why they didn't go through, but they're all in my 15th-25th best songs/performances this year, above songs that qualified ahead of them. I don't know if they were hurt by context and would have done better in a different semi final line up? I like to think so!
Because you were putting out several videos a DAY in recent weeks and I have been watching those religiously like a crack addict, now when you don't post a video for a day, I already miss your faces so much! You guys are doing an amazing job!
+1992ruma it's a joke that they rated Poland so low even if you think the song is outdated, it was still a catchy chorus and during Recap it would totally stand out ahead of many other songs. I'm sorry for Poland.
I really think eurovision should be 100% televote, because if the winner isn't the televote's favorite and with the new sistem everyone can see it, there will be only more petitions and hate for the winner(like this year) and so on
A final point about Ukraine. I was in the mosh pit at globen for this song and it was really noticeable that the top 4 songs were the main 4 that 1.gave me a massive feeling and 2. made the crowd go CRAZY. Bulgaria got everyone jumping and cheering, Australia was the same and had the biggest cheers in the stadium other than Sweden. everyone was saying WOW after Russia and Ukraine gave me massive Chills and made me literally shed a tear. I was with my best friend who isn't a massive eurofan and they were also the 4 that he turned to me and said WOW. Ukraine was so incredibly intense. Her movements, her voice, her facial expressions. They all conveyed a passion, an intensity, a realness that you can only get from writing and performing such a personal song. You can't get the same thing from singing a manufactured song written by someone else, even if you are as talented as poli and Dami. That's why Ukraine won in my opinion.
No matter WHAT you do, you will NEVER remove bias from voting. Not from Jury or Televoting. Its completely impossible. We humans have our personal biases so deeply ingrained into us that we dont even know most of the time we have them.
'bias' in music competitions is also known as taste. People just have different tastes. It would suck if everyone liked the same songs for the same reasons.
I think to reduce the jurys influence would be a sensible step. How can 200 people have 50% impact compared to millions of televoters?To rank Poland, Austria or poor Germany lowest or refuse to give Russia any points because of anti-russian sentiments is just not professional and in my opinion very unfair. Concerning Poland: I'm a young swiss woman and I really liked the song and his incredble vocals. I voted for him. If you check out his videos, you can clearly see that he has many non-polish fans. He got points from 35 countries, and I don't believe that every of those countries has a huge polish population.Concerning Germany: her song might not have been the best, but 1!!! Point from the Jury?? Completely unjust, like last year where they recieved 0 points. I feel verd sorry for Germany.
+aimafa You're right and I'm so thankful for your comment. I didn't know Polish people is the only nation in whole Europe who emigrates and watches Eurovision abroad.... (especially in Belgium, Iceland, Austria and Sweden) Of course, only in 2016, because they forgot to turn on TV last year and Monika Kuszynska was 23th)
I can't help but wonder if Australia's significantly poorer performance in the televote reflected a certain resentment of their inclusion in the competition. You see the issue often brought up in comments sections.
+scanspeak00 Azerbaijan and Armenia aren't quite Europe either, they are West Asian countries or very East European countries.... do you think of a European country when Azerbaijan is mentioned? If I hear the word Azerbaijan, my mind goes: a country that participates in Eurovision :). It's my first thought. So I would wonder why people have a problem with Australia? Just because there is much more water between us? But I agree, I believe that some ignorant viewers didn't understand why Australia is part of Eurovision, since Eurovision has the word "EURO" in it. So even if they liked the song they didn't vote for it.
Arthur Hovhannisyan from Armenia started petition on change.org to review results of Eurovision 2016 and to investigate jurers. The petition gathered 162k signatures so far mine included. Join if you want to make a difference.
17 juries didn't give a single point to Bulgaria. Among them Russia, but Kirkorov has probably forgotten that it was the Bulgarian-led jury in Golden Orpheus 1975 that made Alla Pugachova a star. That was political then as it is now - nothing has changed.
Thankyou sooo much wiwibloggs for all the work you've done this year. Iv been watching from the first video you uploaded this year and I wouldn't have enjoyed eurovision as much if you hadn't kept me updated. plus I hope you do more eurovision charades because it's genuinely hilarious. :D
The juries from the past few years have all been random people that are just as good at ranking songs as anyone! The whole concept with juries is based on theor professionality. But year after year we see that they are not even respecting this contest. Just look at the politics involved and the russian jury. It just makes me so angry because they are ruining a contest that I love since I was a child. Get rid of the juries or reduce their power, and make sure they really are professionals (in my country the jury consists of tv and radio personalities with no experience what so ever).
Love the insight that you guys bring to the table! I basically agree with every point made haha, I think the jury system needs amending desperately by next year! Also holla William for loving Sanja from Serbia, I've seen you mention her a few times on these videos - I was amazed by her performance, felt really touched watching it, she deserved better from the juries for sure! P.s thank you so much for organising the WiwiJam! It was probably my favourite part of the whole week, it was amazing being able to meet the Eurovision artists and the whole evening was great. Was lovely to meet the Wiwi team too - keep on slaayyying ;)
I think they should either get rid of the juries or reduce! 25% I guess is good! Poland didn't deserve to be rated that poorly, I don't even know what happened -.-
Great video guys - some great points. Re the juries - I definitely agree that they need to monitor or supervise their giving of the votes. It definitely seems like the whole process is completely unsupervised and I think counties who have a 'dodgy' history like Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Russia etc DEFINITELY need to have their jurors supervised. As for the uk vote, it does seem a bit fishy but then again the Georgian song is soooooooooo Britpop that of any country in the competition you'd expect UK to give it high points. I wasn't surprised when I heard that result. re Poland and Austria - I think these are real family songs - very simple melodies with simple staging. I think his really would have hit a note with young viewers. You can imagine every 6-12 year old little girl watching Austria - seeing a gorgeous princess sing in French walking through wonderland is going to say 'mummy, I want to vote for Austria!!!' I think Poland had that very simple accessible song type too.
I think the jury should still have 50% of the vote but maybe get rid of the 1 to 26 ranking that so many of them are abusing by putting favourites down as 26th.
+Gavin McGuinness EXACTLY! Most of the time, if you don't like a song, you simply don't like the song. There's no difference between 20th place and 26th place. You simply don't like those song. Period. So there's no need to rank the countries from 1-26. The jurors should just vote for their top 10 songs that they liked. They shouldn't be allowed to vote AGAINST a song. That only gives them room for manipulation... In other words: Let's go back to the system from 2009-2012. It was far superior. SVT fucked up twice by introducing a new system in 2013 and another new system in 2016...
***** I didn't. The last 4 minutes were exciting, but the initial 40 minutes were hella boring and random. I missed seeing where the 8p and 10p go to; they were very important to create suspense. And I want to see what each country loved the most. If Germany loved Frans, I want to see the 12p going to Sweden. I don't want to see that five people decided to give it to Israel.
I'd read somewhere that the Ericsson Globe in Stockholm seats 16,000 people. The largest venue in Iceland is HARPA, which seats 1,800. Though the winning country doesn't have to host the following year, it's kind of a let down if they don't- and hasn't happened since the 80's. Isn't it possible that practical concerns such a staging, roadways, accessibility, and even hotel accommodations factor into the juror's votes?
In an interview, a German jury member (2015) said that they discussed about the quality of the songs and therefore their ranking is almost the same -.-
+Good Night Moon Those are good points. And I do agree with your subjective critiques of "1944." It does, to me, have an avant-garde, mystical feel (like Bjork). While "Sound of Silence" can be argued as having a "generic empty pop ballad" feel, or in other words, mass-appeal (using your Kelly Clarkson example). But let's set aside our subjective judgments and look at the numbers. I can justify why and how Russia and Ukraine came 1st and 2nd, respectively, in the Grand Final tele-votes. Sergey won the tele-votes in his semi by a large margin. When we take a look at the 2nd Semi, Jamala won the tele-votes. However, just 10 points behind Jamala, Dami (AUS) was second. And Australia was ahead of Belgium (3rd) and Poland (4th). Yet in the Grand Final, Michal (POL) pulls ahead of Dami. That to me was very surprising. I guess, it can be argued that Michal's fans rallied and voted on the night that counted the most and/or Dami's fans did not. But it does, still, make me scratch my head and wonder. There is no doubt, based on the Grand Final Tele-vote scores, there was a shift from the 2nd Semi night to the Grand Final night: there was a rise in popularity of Michal's "Color of Your Life" over Dami's "Sound of Silence" and Laura's "What the Pressure" (BEL). But I don't understand why. I guess another set of good trend indicators to check on the popularity of the songs is to look at record sales figures (iTunes downloads, etc.), number of radio plays (Spotify and/or traditional radio plays), RUclips views, and many other forms of how people consume popular music. Anyways, it was an exciting conclusion to Eurovision 2016. Definitely keep the new vote presentation format!
Good Night Moon I think you are cherry picking certain statistical facts and analyses. In each semi, with how various countries are somewhat evenly distributed geographically, culturally, and historically, the results obtained can be a reliable indicator as to how each country will fare in the Grand Final. Also, I'd argue that people who vote in the semis are die-hard fans, or in other words, trend-setters, rather than outliers as you seem to believe. In marketing, we look to trend-setters to extrapolate how the masses will behave. As for your second point, here I admit I overlooked this phenomenon. If the cursed 2nd position is true, then I'd say it comes as no surprise that Greece was eliminated in the 1st Semi and Czech Republic ended up 2nd to last in the Grand Final. But then Poland in the 2nd Semi can be seen as an outlier that broke the "curse," yet was still affected by it (Michal garnered less tele-votes than he might have had, were he in a different position). Now, for your last point: I'm not so sure I agree with you fully, or in other words I somewhat agree with you, but not for the reason you laid out. As you've pointed out, not all songs entered in to competition are in the same genre or style. So you can't really compare apples to oranges. True. But you can look at past entrants of similar style to see how they fared in the mass market, in their genre, and in their niche sector, etc. in relation to how they ranked in their competition, to "divine" a trajectory for a new entrant. In that regards, analyses of sales and radio play may be an accurate indicator. Also, for the "visual" aspect of the performance, I included a possible analysis of RUclips views. So, after my last post, I kinda nerded out and checked the view counts of the 2nd Semi performance for Poland and for Australia. Poland won. So now I'm satisfied. Even without the in depth breakdown of numbers and figures.
+Freuod o The juries seems to be more focused on the music production as they are specialists, and less on a songs message. Poland is very important this year; with a message to all of us. Thanks.:) My color is pure white.:)
+Freuod o agreed with you, sound ridiculous but I heard on other pages of ESC, that Poland was punished like this, because they refused to host the migrants....
Freuod o I know ur comment is old, but Poland has never even deserved top 5 since mid 2000's, also Georgia's song was dated and I think her smoke machine failed so they deserved more points than Poland.
One russian famous tv- presenter Otar Kushinashvilly yesterday said that his school classmate was among Georgian juries. And in the evening befor the Grand Final, when there was LIVE translation of jury rehreasal, and juries had to vote. Otar phoned to his classmate to ask how much points he gave to Russia. And that georgian jury was in restourant. when Otar asked - why he doesnt watch LIVE translation and doesnt vote. He said that he already rated countries and dont need to watch this translation. And he knew that he will rate Russia on last places long before the song was released.
I think it is impossible to rank 26 songs in a purely objective manner. Obviously, personal biases will come into play involving musical style but also a lot of other factors. It would not surprise me if jurors end up talking to each other to get ideas on how to rank the songs, because they probably don't know individually what the proper ranking should be. In fact, maybe the EBU should just change the rules to allow that. But ideally, I think that instead of having jurors rank the songs, they should give each song a score from 1 to 10 like the Wiwi jury, and then the songs would be ranked based on average jury score.
Just because something is personal, doesn't mean it's not political and it's not breaking the rules. Yes she had a lot of passion, so did a lot of other entries. I hope they don't host next year in Ukraine, they don't have the funds and the nation itself isn't very stable. Along with that Russia is threatening a boycott of next year's show as well.
It was very political and it shouldn't have even been able to enter. Georgia in 2009 got the boot when they tried entering a song that was too political so why not Ukraine?
Jamala's song IS political. And, I guess, everyone kinda forgot about that one RULE of ESC that clearly states that the song should not be political. And Jamala herself admitted that the song is political and it was written about two years ago(when Crimea voted to become a part of the Russian Federation) and IS ABOUT that point in the modern history. She called it 1946 only because she knew the shouldn't let her perform with a song like that in a time like now. I personally think Australia was the clear winner(although there were a lot of good songs this year(Yeah, Serbia, France and Bulgaria). Interesting how Australia actually got hurt BY THE TELEVOTE. Because many Europeans just couldn't accept Australia as a winner of a EUROPEAN song contest. But the fact is the JURY is too bias. Not many countries were able to vote objectively. Well, as usuall. I really miss the time when Norway's Rybak won and Russia's Bilan and of course the marvelous Conchita from Austia(to me her song is still the winner, I haven't heard any song yet that could even compete against Rise Like A Phoenix. Even Dami Im)
The juries need to be strictly observed for next year because the danish and the russian were rediculous. Also I think the armenian jury was probably the only one who didn't look at politics like armenians love russia and they gave them 12pts in the televote but only giving them 2 in the jury like I get that, Russia did have a top10 performance, not a top5 or top3.
People on Crimea today has also a voice to be heard. As Jamala's family story has a voice to be heard from the past. The past, present and future should go hand in hand.:) "A Million Voices."
+James Veen Just dont forget that she sings about her ancestors, who collaborated with nazis, took part in ethnic cleansing of Crimean population , lived and fought together with Hitler army for 2 years against russians and ukranians. ANd when in 1944 Red Army freed Crimea from nazis....they sow what crimean tatars have done together with nazis, and government punished them in most soft way. Deportation to |Central Asia is not worst thing among those that happened with people of USSR in WWII. If you google, you ll see that Central Asia and Uzbekistan are normal place to live, weather is warm, big population. ANd if Jamala thinks that only crimean tatars suffered from bad conditions in 1944. ... Well... half of USSR was totally ruined by Hitler army, people suffered from hunger, povetry, they were exhosted, most men died, actually nearly whole generation of soviet men died in WWII. And Crimean tatars helped hitler in this procces. + if you didnt know, 98% of Crimean population has always been and is now - ethnic russians. if you want to hear their voice - look at the results of referendum in 2014, when they joined Russia. they suffered from ukranian antirussin nazism for 25 years, now they are happy.
Thanks a lot for your insight. I'm thankful that Crimea is a part of Russia now. And the same should Jamala be. I'm sure she would be, if all voices was heard. This is definitely a start.:)
yeah! thanks so much for all your vids and efforts. looking forward to see new videos...otherwise I don't know how to be happy. Post Eurovision depression hit me.
although the new system was exciting and thrilling now the dust has settle there are many puzzling issues to iron out - I agree with Chris that if EBU want to continue with this system they need to be far more careful with criteria etc, question the jury decisions mostly, what was the criteria? Very questionable plus you need to look at what hapend in the semi's i noticed that Iceland was 14th not even 11th - very odd indeed.
New Zealand calling. Enjoyed your reviews during Eurovision. Before the Grand Final...I had Australia as the winning song. And I watched the Semi Finals again....at first Jamala from the Ukraine was up there in my top 10, then I watched her performance again and watched Dami again. I concluded that Jamala's song had so much more passion. She was convincing in delivery and she had a story she was telling from the heart I believed and for this reason she was my pick to win. That said, Dami Im still had the best vocals n the competition in my view. I would be interested to know what the Russian delegation thought of Ukraine's win. We all know what the Russian politicians thought. Congrats to Ukraine.
Isn't it so that the judges judge the performance of the day before (final dress rehearsal)? That could also be an explanation for the difference between televote and jury.
to me,they should add more categories such as best vocal, best stage performances and whatsoever rather than 1 winner, 1 trophy that at the end people gonna argue with the "bias" issue all over again. sorry if i'm wrong, i'm from Malaysia and I just found this Eurovision show this year and I found it very interesting event that I hope my country can be a part of this great show. If u ask me, my favourite entry is Australia and Lithuania.
Eurovision songs are frequently political in scope. Just last year there was "N'oubliez pas," "Face the Shadow," and Hungary's entry "Wars For Nothing." Political hot topics such as gay rights and domestic abuse were featured this year in "Made of Stars" and "Goodbye-Shelter." Believing in 'the message' behind the song is what helped make Conchita Wurst a winner two years ago. I disagree that the best song should reflect the song most people will buy. By this same philosophy "Star Wars VII" should have won Best Picture at the Oscars and McDonalds should have a 5 star rating from Zagat. Mass consumption is rarely an indicator of quality.
+EURO VIZ USA YAY Exactly. People only bring up the political argument when they don't like the song that won. Eurofans tend to throw these kinds of tantrums when they don't like the results. In about a month or two, everyone will calm down and get over it. And in a year when we get the new winner, people will once again get mad and call it politics.
I think Austria did so well with televoters because Loin D'ici is incredibly catchy (as in it's impossible to get out of your head once it's in) and Zoe is adorable and people just have to look at her for two seconds to love her.
I disagree about Poland and Austria. It was a good idea to send songs which gonna be loved by people. The reason of this gap is that people from jury are always trying to be like "OMG, Ukraine sounds so fresh! And Poland and Austria sound so 90th!". Oh, please, guys! Why some songs can't be just FUN! Of course polish song is from the deep 90th, but that was the point you missed. Yes, you missed it. Because people didn't. There are millions of people less snob than you and can admit that the song touches. And many of them (like me) love music from 80-90ths. That's why Poland is number 3. And the same about Austria. Now about Polish diaspora... Guys, are you serious?! How could you possibly say this about Poland and didn't say anything about Ukraine. Hello!!! The song is half in Turkish! Look around yourself which country you wouldn't be from, and that's the answer why Ukraine took 2nd place in televoting. Muslim woman totally covered in fully closed dress crying about nazism to arabic music! How do you think, who voted? Kirkorov is right about reducing jury influence, but I have better idea how to deal with it. Jury has to give not points, but coefficients to the songs. Let's say it would be done this way: 1st place (instead of 12 points) 1,5 2) 1,4 3) 1,3 4) 1,25 5) 1,2 6) 1,15 7) 1,1 8) 1,05 Then the middle coefficient counts and multiplies to the televoting points. example: the country got middle coefficient 1.2, televoting summary 200 points, 200*1.2=240 points in total. voilà! So we decrease "neighborhood voting" effect, and jury doesn't decide EVERYTHING anymore.
Different artist Malta was my winner that year. Malta always gets few televotes because it doesnt have neighboors or because people dont take it into account when it comes to voting
Australia was soo close! Then when I saw the article Australia would've won the old system I'm like argh! Though I do understand this system. Actually I knew in televotes..Australia wouldn't get as high as there's ppl in Europe who don't understand Australia competing, based on that Australia did better than I thought. I didn't expect Poland to get higher points in the televote than Australia though. If Australia came 3rd in televotes, would Australia have won? I mean Poland definitely preformed well, but based on the song itself. I don't know the specifics on the jury voting..But I agree it should be done in isolation. And they shouldn't really be allowed to discuss it with each other as that would influence their decision. The thing is though no matter how they change the system, ppl will always have something to say. And deciding who wins is a battle between logical vs emotional and ppl have different opinions between those.
I just didn't understand the final... I hoped Australia would win and tbh I don't like Jamala's song very much. In my opinion Sweden and Lithuani are totally overrated and Serbia and Spain totally underrated. I also don't understand how we could get ranked last again! Last year we really deserved it because the sing wasn't good at all but Jamie Lee did a great job and I don't know if it's because of her Japanese fashion style or the song or the political sutuation of Germany right now, but we didn't deserve last place!
I really liked Jamie-Lee's song, and she was sooo cute, I personally loved her Decora/Fairy-Kei fashion; I voted for her! I also loved Germany's song last year too...I don't know why people like Germany...but don't give up you guys won it not too long ago😌 (from Australia)
The only thing I thought is maybe they need to change the way they present the Top 10 on screen..it did start to make sense as they were going through it, but e.g maybe after saying which country is the 10th put 10th on the screen as I found it hard to remember the ranking only towards the end. Or split the screen maybe one section jury, the other televote? Something to make it easier to follow
I think the jury system they have now is excellent BUT BUT BUT the juries need to be FAIR and that's the only difference I would make. A couple of people that should check the jury votes before they count and ask why and how. Also, my country ( Belgium ) gave no points to Russia because the song sucks.. That's what a jury member said on Belgian television. And since we gave Russia only 4 points or something like that in the televote Belgium agrees
+Orlando Quin Yes, they don't need to get rid of the juries or make them less than 50%, they just need to do a better job of ensuring the results are fair and independent. There needs to be more oversight of jurors who are chosen and making sure the rules are adhered to and there's no collusion and no relationships between jurors and entrants that could result in bias. I'm not entirely sure how it would be implemented but something like that needs to happen.
+Orlando Quin At least the Russian song wasn't as dated as yours. Belgium was '70s disco music with also some copy off of "Another One Bites the Dust". And the title "What's the Pressure?" is dumb.
+Jo Brock well if Belgium reaches the final it's always top 10 and ye it was outdated but Laura made it look good by having a killer performance .. otherwise she wouldn't be third ( close to second ) in her semi final
to have 5 jurors in the same room unsupervised is asking for trouble as the Russian episode quite clearly showed, should the jury vote be examined and even vetoed when it clearly is suspect as happened with some this year ? I don't know what % voting effect they should have is difficult to say, I think this year's result was very good for the contest in the long term and I don't even like the winner but I dislike the manufactured Scandinavian pop sound even more
I think there were many viewers who didn't vote for Australia because they considered Australia should not have been in the contest. It was the best song, the best artist and this was recognised by the juries all over Europe.
All of the ex Yugoslav countries nearly qualified!!!! 1. Serbia and Croatia got through, just in 10th. 2. Macedonia was unluckiest. 8th on televote on 11th on jury - 11th overall. 3. Bosnia were 8th on televote but 14th on jury and 11th overall. 4. Montenegro shockingly came in 10th on the jury but the televoters had sense and ranked them near last... 13th overall. 5. Slovenia were 10th on the jury but almost last on the televote... 14th overall!!!!
A good and very honest review from you guys. I was so disappointed by the political element to the final winner. The jury vote needs to be completely reworked or it could destroy our beloved Eurovision.
Well, 17 countries didn't give anything to Ukraine, And to me russian song is really 13-th place or less, all the votes were for perfomance. And we have a song contest. After Fenix, Heroes and Euphoia, how could "thunder and lightning it's getting exiting" win?
+RadioLA Besides, if we speak about fairness of jury: in russian jury was Anastasia Stotskaja, whose producer is (was?) Fillip Kirkorov. Is that fair? But she was discualified for posting her opinion in periscope.
+RadioLA I agree with most jury decidions this year, seems like they were really judjing well (as a whole) and right things. I agree with Poland one of the last, with Austria one of the last, with Australia and Ukrain first.
+RadioLA Jamala stood out not only because of the theme of her song, but in general, she was alike nobody (meanwhile everybody was discauusing like this perfomance was alike Beyonce in 2011, this was like last year, this song is like that song and so on), she was the most emotional and emotion causing.
It's slightly astonishing that in screenshot of movies "Our bottom 3" and "Who did the juries hurt most" Michał Szpak appears. And I agree with Chris about Polish results.
Michal from Poland is amazing, what is wrong with older sounding songs, why do we have to have up to date sounding songs, if i want modern I'd go to the charts, I want different.
I know people disagree with the Jurys but they are needed. I cant speak for other countries but in the UK for the past 3 years our televotes have given 12-10pts to either Lithuania or Poland showing that its pretty obvious the only people voting during eurovision here are the Lithuanian and polish people that's moved here. The jurys help so we dont have the same result every year.
+dancingtoelectro It only depicts that UK people don't really care for voting in ESC. Polish and Lithuanian people are still minorities there, if more UK people voted, the results would be different.
Oh, right, and when the UK jury gave 12 points to Georgia it improved confidence in the voting from Grest Britain? I'm neither Polish nor Lithuanian but I would rather prefer these countries picking up votes because thousand people were bothered to express their opinion as opposed to five jurers making a joke
i think georgia did well in uk because independent rock is getting more mainstream and without the juries countries like Czech Republic would do well when they deserve much better ranking
I agree about the juries. I don't think that lowering the power of the juries will do as much as changing the way they work. I would prefer them to be separated in different rooms and that no conversation whatsoever can happen between jurors when they are judging. Also, the type of jurors that are chosen should be changed. These should be people that now how music works like educated composers and musicians...not just past national final participants that may not write their own songs or anything.
After seeing the grand finals voting I came across three things. 1. The juries can feel forced to vote for political reasons. Hard to cope with. 2. Not enough TV camera time on those who got the best televoting. 3. The results after old voting system is not the same... Including, better to see what the public has voted for per country. The old way of Eurovision is no longer existing. It seems to go for a TV-production in line with more focus on excitement. A hard choice to decide wether public or jury votes should be presented first. Petra seemed very forced to hear the votes from the presenters. But she did very great. This years winner is not the winner. The results differ too much. This year, you decide the winner.:)
In my opinion there should be 50 jury members per country who are a mix of music professionals and normal people and have an equal split of genders and a variety of age. Also they shouldn't be allowed to listen to the songs before judging and shouldn't know which country it is singing throughout, and they should judge in complete isolation to achieve the fairest possible score. This will avoid all the political voting the juries do particularly between Armenia and Azerbaijan. The EBU really need to have a look at the Jury's because mistakes like the ones made this year can't really go on. Roll on Kiev 2017! (Even though I really didn't like Jamala's song) ;)
I watched eurovision at home and I have to be honest I didn't pay much attention to cyprus and serbia only because Dami Im killed it and I guess it they got lost
I think Malta did well because it's the type of song juries (and I, lol) tend to like. Female Maltese solo vocalists do have a history of doing Eurovision very well. I completely get the appeal of the song. I think it suffered in the televote because in a year with so many female solo vocalists it got forgotten.
I, too, thought the juries were to keep a check on the public but they are actually screwing up the results. I don't think increasing their numbers will help. It is too difficult to make them honest & we can't allow them to derail the public vote again. The competition is for the public, not the juries. Their political bias is unforgivable. Enough! The juries should be scrapped completely.
Who here is what I think ; Well I'm my opinion if Dami I'm would've represented a European country instead of Australia she would've come higher in the televote and would have won overall. I say this because many people and some friends told me oh I loved Australia but I don't want them to win because they're not in Europe and because of this they didn't vote for her, so yeah if she would've represented a European country the turn out would have probably been different
Overrated: SWEDEN! Underrated or deserved better places: Spain, Austria, Israel, Serbia, Czech republic btw this situation about juries i think that has been happening since long time ago...just with the new system we can see it even clearer...
Luka Bogdanović I totally agree . Actually I wanted to Ukraine win but this kind of winning is not fair. Russia got people votes all over the worlds . and Poland did amazing job bur jury shoot him down..
Nutzername92a Turkish diaspora are in only 3 country Germany France and Netherlands. And jury votes are in everywhere. By the way it's not about it. If you watch again in 2009 and 2010 we got 12 points from all Diaspora Countries. And 2012 too we got top points ..
The juries are still needed as a balance, otherwise songs like Poland's would win. The juries take out a possible Taylor Swift/ Justin Bieber factor. ( Yes, I'm going to get some hate but I'm 49...). Liked the scoring this year,it was much more exciting and surprising. My biggest shock was how poorly Spain did ( again!) in both televoting and juries. So much buzz and I was at the Tele2 party and wow, did she get applause. I think if she left out that staged fall, she would have done better. LIked your cameoes, WIll and Deban with Petra!!
+Bart Staelens Thanks Bart! Sometimes one can not estimate the power of the televote. Does the televote reflect the diverse nature of the audience or do many viewers vote for 'jokes'? The televote saves Austria which was a fan favorite, but killed Spain. Poor Spain, they do send good songs ( esp. since 2010 )but never get rewarded. I don't think it's the 'curse' of the big 5 either ( France made a big comeback this year).
The UK was robbed in the Jury and Televote I do not understand that a song that was in the bookies Top 10 on the night, performing in 25th, a prime performing position to come 24th. 24th this song is no Electro Velvet, it is much, much, much more superior than that I completely disagree with Poraig about the UK's votes being underserved (not towards Georgia, I'm talking about points awarded to the UK). in short the UK deserved a Top 10 finish that night and I think that the UK was robbed point blank.
Lol no. In no world did Joe & Jake deserve to be in the top 10. Sure, their song was far superior to Electro Velvet. And they did far better than Electro Velvet, so be happy :D
+Liam Alan Lindsay The UK was in the bookies always between 20 and 30, look at youtubes, it was even always lower than Denmark, who did not even make it to the final. It was Spain who has been robbed. Love from France.
I agree, reduce jury to 25%! Too much power for 200 people opposed to thousands of viewers
+MrMarconi Rus Agree or get rid of jury at all, because in most countries jury was not professional at all.
+MrMarconi Rus yes, the only solution to lower their corruptive power. With a 50% of the votes, there will be corruption and Eurovision should be a corruption free festival, especially if it's the tv audience that pay for each vote.
Good Night Moon Probably you are right, but not 50%, 25% would be enough.
+Good Night Moon no matter how many people are in the jury....or even every jury member watching Eurovision in an isolated cabin without wifi so that they won't share their votes with the other members - they can always agree on their results beforehand. No matter if you have 5 jurors, 10 or 20. They can all stick together and say: Let's give 12 points to XXX and 0 or 1 point to XXX.
+Mitchel Rieger I forgot to mention. They could even agree on every member voting different but yet getting the desired result. That way it would look like a "normal" jury vote result. If you have 5 people, it's very easy to say: How do we have to vote in order to give XXX 12 points without having the same votes. So they agree that juror 1 gives 12 points, juror number 2 only 1 pointe, but jury 3 and 4 give 8 points and jury number 5 10 points. Result: 12 points from Azerbaijan go to XXX. And in order to harm the other favourites, they agree on different votes, low enough that the other favourites won't receive any points. It's corruption - made as easy as possible.
Guys you did an amazing job: the whole build up, 2 weeks in Stockholm and the final! Wiwi Blogs is the real winner here guys! Here is to next year, cheers from Scotland!
Wiwi team are just amazing. Watched each and single video posted during last 2 month. Great job guys. U r ahead 100 steps from your old fashion competitors (would not mention the name) & welcome to Ukraine! 🇺🇦💋
I thibnk the jury vote on Poland is completely unjustified.
If a timeless ballad is popular and beloved by people of today it is current by proof.
Also, Michael Szpak has a much more powerful voice and delivery than Frans.
IMO the jury vote of Sweden so high was also unjustified.
i guess I am kind of off topic but does anybody know a good website to watch newly released tv shows online ?
@Roger Ronan Flixportal :)
@Braden Easton thank you, I signed up and it seems like they got a lot of movies there :D I appreciate it !!
@Roger Ronan happy to help :)
Keep in mind that jurors and viewers vote in two different shows. Michał messed it up badly in the jury final. That's it.
Not only the polish diaspora voted for Poland!! its not true! people loved this song and loved Michal from all countries and nationalitis
I know I'm coming here years later but I not really see anything wrong with diaspora, what is wrong with Poland and the polish people backing their man.
( I'm not polish by the way.)
The televote and the juries are needed. I agree that there has to be stronger rules for the jurors but now that the new voting system doesn't punish jury-televoting discrepancies, I feel like it's more fair and a step in the right direction.
+mdcb91 I agree, but what rules? How can you control a juror's vote? 5 people sit in a room together and they combine their votes and Europe will only know once the contest is over? I mean it's a perfect system for corruption. The only way is lowering the jury's power, don't you think? Because you can't have a rule saying that it's not allowed that juror's have the same winner and 2nd place. I mean you can't control their taste, because within 5 people, it actually could happen that 2 or 3 of them have very similar results. So what does the EBU need to acuse them of fraud? I can't see any solution but a 25% jury vote only.
+Mitchel Rieger jurors should be isolated and maybe they could have more (from 5 to 7 or 10) and a prosecutor of some kind. Plus ok we take them to 25% so the audience has most of the power? that's not healthy, people can be even more biased than jurors. I think there's NO perfect system but this new system is good at balancing jurors and televoters.
+mdcb91 thanks for replying. Look, but even if jurors are isolated. If they agree beforehand to give Russia 0 points and Georgia 12 points. I mean... you can't control what they agreed on before. And I disagree that a whole nation is more biased than jurors. A country may give 12 points to their neighbour country, whether it deserves them or not, but at least you get the other points right. With corruption within a jury... they agree on the whole ranking. I can't remember the year, but it happened a few years ago I believe with the Azerbaijan vote, where they knew they were favourite and the 2nd favourite all the jury members they would place last in their vote. I mean come on!!!! But that strategy doesn't happen with the televote. For me it's worse that 5 people have 50% power and being corrupted than e.g. 3 million people voting and handing 12 points to their neighbour, but with a "common sense" 10, 8, 7, 6 points....
+Mitchel Rieger no problem, and that's a really valid argument, however what if only the "memorable" performances because of expensive antics or visual effects get points from the audience? Poorer countries with good performances will lose unless they are supported by jurors, let's not act like ALL jurors are corrupt, that's a bold assumption. Russia and Poland will always benefit from the audience votes bc of immigration, do you want them to win or place top 3 every year? We need a 50/50 balance in my opinion.
Mitchel Rieger: _"And I disagree that a whole nation is more biased than jurors. A country may give 12 points to their neighbour country, whether it deserves them or not, but at least you get the other points right."_
- No, you don't. The televote doesn't even reflect the preferences of the audience for every song. Every time someone votes, they do so for only one song, the top one according to them. Such vote is uninformative about they rank of all the other songs.
On the other hand, it isn't just one country giving 12, 10 o 8 points to its neighbour (BTW, this has also always happened with the jury vote), it's half a countries voting for the same neighbour. That's the case with Russia. Which countries vote for Russia through televote? Those with large ethnic Russian minorities (former Soviet Republics), traditional allies (Serbia). Likewise with the ethnic minorities residing in the former Yugoslavia. Finally, there are the diasporas of Poles, Bulgarians, Romanians, Turkish, and countries with so small audiences whose preferences can be easily rigged (San Marino, Malta, Andorra, Montenegro, Iceland, Cyprus, Estonia).
Guys, thank you for your job and for your amazing RUclips channel. From Russia with love.
Only thing I can say - so many songs were underrated this year, especially these ones that had a lot of fans, but stuck in semi-finals...
+Антон Шаронов Hear them Calling and Icebreaker are both in my overall top fifteen. Denmark and Slovenia and Ireland, I can all understand why they didn't go through, but they're all in my 15th-25th best songs/performances this year, above songs that qualified ahead of them. I don't know if they were hurt by context and would have done better in a different semi final line up? I like to think so!
+Антон Шаронов And IVAN - I voted for him, I know a lot of people from Poland also did and yet he didn't make it to the final ;/ Sooo disappointing.
***** :С
Because you were putting out several videos a DAY in recent weeks and I have been watching those religiously like a crack addict, now when you don't post a video for a day, I already miss your faces so much! You guys are doing an amazing job!
armenia did not deserved to be 7th ...that was unfair...she deserved to be in top 3 at least
Nice review, but Armenia should be in the top5
+ESC. AM should've won tbh
yaaas lovewave
+ESC. AM I am shocked about Armenia's low result. How?!!!!!!!!!
+ESC. AM no, Armenia did well, i didn't like it personally, but okay.
Yes
Thank you exquisite music critics called 'the juries' for ridiculously low points for Poland for the third year in the row. REALLY THANKS.
+1992ruma it's a joke that they rated Poland so low even if you think the song is outdated, it was still a catchy chorus and during Recap it would totally stand out ahead of many other songs. I'm sorry for Poland.
I really think eurovision should be 100% televote, because if the winner isn't the televote's favorite and with the new sistem everyone can see it, there will be only more petitions and hate for the winner(like this year) and so on
The 100% televoting was highly unfair. Countries just voted for their neighbours and some pretty awful songs won because of it
Stefan Hadar Italy 2015 and Russia 2016 SHOULD HAVE WON. It's unfair
The jury needs a huge reform.
The jury needs to be abolished.
A final point about Ukraine. I was in the mosh pit at globen for this song and it was really noticeable that the top 4 songs were the main 4 that 1.gave me a massive feeling and 2. made the crowd go CRAZY. Bulgaria got everyone jumping and cheering, Australia was the same and had the biggest cheers in the stadium other than Sweden. everyone was saying WOW after Russia and Ukraine gave me massive
Chills and made me literally shed a tear. I was with my best friend who isn't a massive eurofan and they were also the 4 that he turned to me and said WOW.
Ukraine was so incredibly intense. Her movements, her voice, her facial expressions. They all conveyed a passion, an intensity, a realness that you can only get from writing and performing such a personal song. You can't get the same thing from singing a manufactured song written by someone else, even if you are as talented as poli and Dami. That's why Ukraine won in my opinion.
you hit the nail on the head. i agree
Jury is corrupted... Poland was at the bottom of their rankings for the last 3 years??? coincidence??
William. Jamala admitted herself in many different interviews that her song is POLITICAL. Admit it already!
Shut up its personal for her family
+jake scales yea. crimea 2014
No matter WHAT you do, you will NEVER remove bias from voting. Not from Jury or Televoting. Its completely impossible. We humans have our personal biases so deeply ingrained into us that we dont even know most of the time we have them.
'bias' in music competitions is also known as taste. People just have different tastes. It would suck if everyone liked the same songs for the same reasons.
I think to reduce the jurys influence would be a sensible step. How can 200 people have 50% impact compared to millions of televoters?To rank Poland, Austria or poor Germany lowest or refuse to give Russia any points because of anti-russian sentiments is just not professional and in my opinion very unfair. Concerning Poland: I'm a young swiss woman and I really liked the song and his incredble vocals. I voted for him. If you check out his videos, you can clearly see that he has many non-polish fans. He got points from 35 countries, and I don't believe that every of those countries has a huge polish population.Concerning Germany: her song might not have been the best, but 1!!! Point from the Jury?? Completely unjust, like last year where they recieved 0 points. I feel verd sorry for Germany.
+aimafa You're right and I'm so thankful for your comment. I didn't know Polish people is the only nation in whole Europe who emigrates and watches Eurovision abroad.... (especially in Belgium, Iceland, Austria and Sweden) Of course, only in 2016, because they forgot to turn on TV last year and Monika Kuszynska was 23th)
I can't help but wonder if Australia's significantly poorer performance in the televote reflected a certain resentment of their inclusion in the competition. You see the issue often brought up in comments sections.
it's because the eastern block do well in televoting dami should be really proud she came 4th in televoting
scorpioninpink But compare to the jury vote.
+scanspeak00 Azerbaijan and Armenia aren't quite Europe either, they are West Asian countries or very East European countries.... do you think of a European country when Azerbaijan is mentioned? If I hear the word Azerbaijan, my mind goes: a country that participates in Eurovision :). It's my first thought. So I would wonder why people have a problem with Australia? Just because there is much more water between us? But I agree, I believe that some ignorant viewers didn't understand why Australia is part of Eurovision, since Eurovision has the word "EURO" in it. So even if they liked the song they didn't vote for it.
+scorpioninpink czechia?
Arthur Hovhannisyan from Armenia started petition on change.org to review results of Eurovision 2016 and to investigate jurers. The petition gathered 162k signatures so far mine included. Join if you want to make a difference.
17 juries didn't give a single point to Bulgaria. Among them Russia, but Kirkorov has probably forgotten that it was the Bulgarian-led jury in Golden Orpheus 1975 that made Alla Pugachova a star. That was political then as it is now - nothing has changed.
The Polish diaspora? We're not as big...Do you even hear yourself?
Thankyou sooo much wiwibloggs for all the work you've done this year. Iv been watching from the first video you uploaded this year and I wouldn't have enjoyed eurovision as much if you hadn't kept me updated. plus I hope you do more eurovision charades because it's genuinely hilarious. :D
The juries from the past few years have all been random people that are just as good at ranking songs as anyone! The whole concept with juries is based on theor professionality. But year after year we see that they are not even respecting this contest. Just look at the politics involved and the russian jury. It just makes me so angry because they are ruining a contest that I love since I was a child. Get rid of the juries or reduce their power, and make sure they really are professionals (in my country the jury consists of tv and radio personalities with no experience what so ever).
+Bernhardina Hörnstein Agree 100%
Are You going to do a " Who the tele-voters hurt the most?"
+ESC Ireland rip spain, rip czech, rip croatia
+Markstubation01 she was not
Markstubation01 No she isnt
Completely agree that the jury members should not have contact with each other, and there should be more than 5.
William, thank you form Poland ❤.
The juries were so unfair when it came to Russia and Armenia
Love the insight that you guys bring to the table! I basically agree with every point made haha, I think the jury system needs amending desperately by next year! Also holla William for loving Sanja from Serbia, I've seen you mention her a few times on these videos - I was amazed by her performance, felt really touched watching it, she deserved better from the juries for sure!
P.s thank you so much for organising the WiwiJam! It was probably my favourite part of the whole week, it was amazing being able to meet the Eurovision artists and the whole evening was great. Was lovely to meet the Wiwi team too - keep on slaayyying ;)
I think they should either get rid of the juries or reduce! 25% I guess is good! Poland didn't deserve to be rated that poorly, I don't even know what happened -.-
Finally an objective discussion
I think some of the juries unfairly ignored Ukraine as well: 17 juries did not give Ukraine any points.
Great video guys - some great points.
Re the juries - I definitely agree that they need to monitor or supervise their giving of the votes. It definitely seems like the whole process is completely unsupervised and I think counties who have a 'dodgy' history like Georgia, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Russia etc DEFINITELY need to have their jurors supervised. As for the uk vote, it does seem a bit fishy but then again the Georgian song is soooooooooo Britpop that of any country in the competition you'd expect UK to give it high points. I wasn't surprised when I heard that result.
re Poland and Austria - I think these are real family songs - very simple melodies with simple staging. I think his really would have hit a note with young viewers. You can imagine every 6-12 year old little girl watching Austria - seeing a gorgeous princess sing in French walking through wonderland is going to say 'mummy, I want to vote for Austria!!!' I think Poland had that very simple accessible song type too.
Wow you just described my little sister
I think the jury should still have 50% of the vote but maybe get rid of the 1 to 26 ranking that so many of them are abusing by putting favourites down as 26th.
+Gavin McGuinness EXACTLY! Most of the time, if you don't like a song, you simply don't like the song. There's no difference between 20th place and 26th place. You simply don't like those song. Period.
So there's no need to rank the countries from 1-26. The jurors should just vote for their top 10 songs that they liked. They shouldn't be allowed to vote AGAINST a song. That only gives them room for manipulation...
In other words: Let's go back to the system from 2009-2012. It was far superior. SVT fucked up twice by introducing a new system in 2013 and another new system in 2016...
+Nutzername92a New system in 2016 was a positive change. I really enjoyed how the votes were displayed.
***** I didn't. The last 4 minutes were exciting, but the initial 40 minutes were hella boring and random. I missed seeing where the 8p and 10p go to; they were very important to create suspense. And I want to see what each country loved the most. If Germany loved Frans, I want to see the 12p going to Sweden. I don't want to see that five people decided to give it to Israel.
Oh please, Can We please talk about justice? There is not justice with Spain, Barei deserved more, the crowd was crazy with her #SayYay
I'd read somewhere that the Ericsson Globe in Stockholm seats 16,000 people. The largest venue in Iceland is HARPA, which seats 1,800. Though the winning country doesn't have to host the following year, it's kind of a let down if they don't- and hasn't happened since the 80's. Isn't it possible that practical concerns such a staging, roadways, accessibility, and even hotel accommodations factor into the juror's votes?
In an interview, a German jury member (2015) said that they discussed about the quality of the songs and therefore their ranking is almost the same -.-
I'm really surprised that tele-votes for Dami (AUS) only came at 4th! Why do you think that was?
yeah Australia would have won under the old system, which was around for the history of the event 60 years!
+Good Night Moon Those are good points. And I do agree with your subjective critiques of "1944." It does, to me, have an avant-garde, mystical feel (like Bjork). While "Sound of Silence" can be argued as having a "generic empty pop ballad" feel, or in other words, mass-appeal (using your Kelly Clarkson example). But let's set aside our subjective judgments and look at the numbers.
I can justify why and how Russia and Ukraine came 1st and 2nd, respectively, in the Grand Final tele-votes. Sergey won the tele-votes in his semi by a large margin. When we take a look at the 2nd Semi, Jamala won the tele-votes. However, just 10 points behind Jamala, Dami (AUS) was second. And Australia was ahead of Belgium (3rd) and Poland (4th). Yet in the Grand Final, Michal (POL) pulls ahead of Dami. That to me was very surprising. I guess, it can be argued that Michal's fans rallied and voted on the night that counted the most and/or Dami's fans did not. But it does, still, make me scratch my head and wonder. There is no doubt, based on the Grand Final Tele-vote scores, there was a shift from the 2nd Semi night to the Grand Final night: there was a rise in popularity of Michal's "Color of Your Life" over Dami's "Sound of Silence" and Laura's "What the Pressure" (BEL). But I don't understand why.
I guess another set of good trend indicators to check on the popularity of the songs is to look at record sales figures (iTunes downloads, etc.), number of radio plays (Spotify and/or traditional radio plays), RUclips views, and many other forms of how people consume popular music.
Anyways, it was an exciting conclusion to Eurovision 2016. Definitely keep the new vote presentation format!
Good Night Moon I think you are cherry picking certain statistical facts and analyses. In each semi, with how various countries are somewhat evenly distributed geographically, culturally, and historically, the results obtained can be a reliable indicator as to how each country will fare in the Grand Final. Also, I'd argue that people who vote in the semis are die-hard fans, or in other words, trend-setters, rather than outliers as you seem to believe. In marketing, we look to trend-setters to extrapolate how the masses will behave.
As for your second point, here I admit I overlooked this phenomenon. If the cursed 2nd position is true, then I'd say it comes as no surprise that Greece was eliminated in the 1st Semi and Czech Republic ended up 2nd to last in the Grand Final. But then Poland in the 2nd Semi can be seen as an outlier that broke the "curse," yet was still affected by it (Michal garnered less tele-votes than he might have had, were he in a different position).
Now, for your last point: I'm not so sure I agree with you fully, or in other words I somewhat agree with you, but not for the reason you laid out. As you've pointed out, not all songs entered in to competition are in the same genre or style. So you can't really compare apples to oranges. True. But you can look at past entrants of similar style to see how they fared in the mass market, in their genre, and in their niche sector, etc. in relation to how they ranked in their competition, to "divine" a trajectory for a new entrant. In that regards, analyses of sales and radio play may be an accurate indicator. Also, for the "visual" aspect of the performance, I included a possible analysis of RUclips views. So, after my last post, I kinda nerded out and checked the view counts of the 2nd Semi performance for Poland and for Australia. Poland won.
So now I'm satisfied. Even without the in depth breakdown of numbers and figures.
That it is ridiculous Georgia got 80 points of the jury .. A Polish 7, pure politics ..
Poland should win
Those 12 points from the UK to Georgia were not political.
+Freuod o The juries seems to be more focused on the music production as they are specialists, and less on a songs message.
Poland is very important this year; with a message to all of us. Thanks.:) My color is pure white.:)
+Freuod o agreed with you,
sound ridiculous but I heard on other pages of ESC, that Poland was punished like this, because they refused to host the migrants....
Bart Staelens You are right.
Freuod o I know ur comment is old, but Poland has never even deserved top 5 since mid 2000's, also Georgia's song was dated and I think her smoke machine failed so they deserved more points than Poland.
One russian famous tv- presenter Otar Kushinashvilly yesterday said that his school classmate was among Georgian juries. And in the evening befor the Grand Final, when there was LIVE translation of jury rehreasal, and juries had to vote. Otar phoned to his classmate to ask how much points he gave to Russia. And that georgian jury was in restourant. when Otar asked - why he doesnt watch LIVE translation and doesnt vote. He said that he already rated countries and dont need to watch this translation. And he knew that he will rate Russia on last places long before the song was released.
I think it is impossible to rank 26 songs in a purely objective manner. Obviously, personal biases will come into play involving musical style but also a lot of other factors. It would not surprise me if jurors end up talking to each other to get ideas on how to rank the songs, because they probably don't know individually what the proper ranking should be. In fact, maybe the EBU should just change the rules to allow that. But ideally, I think that instead of having jurors rank the songs, they should give each song a score from 1 to 10 like the Wiwi jury, and then the songs would be ranked based on average jury score.
I personally did not like Australia! we expected Cyprus to do much better what's your take on that??
Just because something is personal, doesn't mean it's not political and it's not breaking the rules. Yes she had a lot of passion, so did a lot of other entries. I hope they don't host next year in Ukraine, they don't have the funds and the nation itself isn't very stable. Along with that Russia is threatening a boycott of next year's show as well.
It was very political and it shouldn't have even been able to enter. Georgia in 2009 got the boot when they tried entering a song that was too political so why not Ukraine?
we are waiting for misheard lyrics videos and for impression videos. :D
Finally something to aid my post eurovision depression. D;
Jamala's song IS political. And, I guess, everyone kinda forgot about that one RULE of ESC that clearly states that the song should not be political. And Jamala herself admitted that the song is political and it was written about two years ago(when Crimea voted to become a part of the Russian Federation) and IS ABOUT that point in the modern history. She called it 1946 only because she knew the shouldn't let her perform with a song like that in a time like now. I personally think Australia was the clear winner(although there were a lot of good songs this year(Yeah, Serbia, France and Bulgaria). Interesting how Australia actually got hurt BY THE TELEVOTE. Because many Europeans just couldn't accept Australia as a winner of a EUROPEAN song contest.
But the fact is the JURY is too bias. Not many countries were able to vote objectively. Well, as usuall. I really miss the time when Norway's Rybak won and Russia's Bilan and of course the marvelous Conchita from Austia(to me her song is still the winner, I haven't heard any song yet that could even compete against Rise Like A Phoenix. Even Dami Im)
Barei deserved more!
Australia this year had such a huge difference. I really hope you do this for 2017 Eurovision
The juries need to be strictly observed for next year because the danish and the russian were rediculous. Also I think the armenian jury was probably the only one who didn't look at politics like armenians love russia and they gave them 12pts in the televote but only giving them 2 in the jury like I get that, Russia did have a top10 performance, not a top5 or top3.
i already miss your interviews with Lazarev
People on Crimea today has also a voice to be heard. As Jamala's family story has a voice to be heard from the past.
The past, present and future should go hand in hand.:) "A Million Voices."
+James Veen Just dont forget that she sings about her ancestors, who collaborated with nazis, took part in ethnic cleansing of Crimean population , lived and fought together with Hitler army for 2 years against russians and ukranians. ANd when in 1944 Red Army freed Crimea from nazis....they sow what crimean tatars have done together with nazis, and government punished them in most soft way. Deportation to |Central Asia is not worst thing among those that happened with people of USSR in WWII. If you google, you ll see that Central Asia and Uzbekistan are normal place to live, weather is warm, big population. ANd if Jamala thinks that only crimean tatars suffered from bad conditions in 1944. ... Well... half of USSR was totally ruined by Hitler army, people suffered from hunger, povetry, they were exhosted, most men died, actually nearly whole generation of soviet men died in WWII. And Crimean tatars helped hitler in this procces. + if you didnt know, 98% of Crimean population has always been and is now - ethnic russians. if you want to hear their voice - look at the results of referendum in 2014, when they joined Russia. they suffered from ukranian antirussin nazism for 25 years, now they are happy.
Thanks a lot for your insight. I'm thankful that Crimea is a part of Russia now. And the same should Jamala be. I'm sure she would be, if all voices was heard. This is definitely a start.:)
I can't believe you didn't say anything about Israel. 11 points from the public? That's a crime.
I mean Poland was also a crime but the juri needs to be there. At least most of them don't vote for their neighbours.
Bart Staelens they should have more juries added.
Croatia and Spain were hurt the most:///
The most underrated songs this year:
1.Serbia
2.Israel
3.Austria
4.Italy
5.Czech Republic.
Those songs should be placed much, much HIGHER!!!
what happened to the intro sound after "let's do this"? ;)
+Mitchel Rieger We were soooo exhausted after Eurovisoin. Technical slip up, but we've slept now so it should be back in all videos :-)
yeah! thanks so much for all your vids and efforts. looking forward to see new videos...otherwise I don't know how to be happy. Post Eurovision depression hit me.
although the new system was exciting and thrilling now the dust has settle there are many puzzling issues to iron out - I agree with Chris that if EBU want to continue with this system they need to be far more careful with criteria etc, question the jury decisions mostly, what was the criteria? Very questionable plus you need to look at what hapend in the semi's i noticed that Iceland was 14th not even 11th - very odd indeed.
New Zealand calling. Enjoyed your reviews during Eurovision. Before the Grand Final...I had Australia as the winning song. And I watched the Semi Finals again....at first Jamala from the Ukraine was up there in my top 10, then I watched her performance again and watched Dami again. I concluded that Jamala's song had so much more passion. She was convincing in delivery and she had a story she was telling from the heart I believed and for this reason she was my pick to win. That said, Dami Im still had the best vocals n the competition in my view. I would be interested to know what the Russian delegation thought of Ukraine's win. We all know what the Russian politicians thought. Congrats to Ukraine.
Isn't it so that the judges judge the performance of the day before (final dress rehearsal)? That could also be an explanation for the difference between televote and jury.
NEWS!! Michał Szpak is the WINNER! GOLDEN OPOLE 2016 in Poland
to me,they should add more categories such as best vocal, best stage performances and whatsoever rather than 1 winner, 1 trophy that at the end people gonna argue with the "bias" issue all over again.
sorry if i'm wrong, i'm from Malaysia and I just found this Eurovision show this year and I found it very interesting event that I hope my country can be a part of this great show. If u ask me, my favourite entry is Australia and Lithuania.
Eurovision songs are frequently political in scope. Just last year there was "N'oubliez pas," "Face the Shadow," and Hungary's entry "Wars For Nothing." Political hot topics such as gay rights and domestic abuse were featured this year in "Made of Stars" and "Goodbye-Shelter." Believing in 'the message' behind the song is what helped make Conchita Wurst a winner two years ago. I disagree that the best song should reflect the song most people will buy. By this same philosophy "Star Wars VII" should have won Best Picture at the Oscars and McDonalds should have a 5 star rating from Zagat. Mass consumption is rarely an indicator of quality.
+EURO VIZ USA YAY Exactly. People only bring up the political argument when they don't like the song that won. Eurofans tend to throw these kinds of tantrums when they don't like the results. In about a month or two, everyone will calm down and get over it. And in a year when we get the new winner, people will once again get mad and call it politics.
@@mistaTHIRTEEN 2022
All of the UK jurors had Georgia in their top 3 actually (2, 2, 3, 2, 1)
I think Austria did so well with televoters because Loin D'ici is incredibly catchy (as in it's impossible to get out of your head once it's in) and Zoe is adorable and people just have to look at her for two seconds to love her.
I disagree about Poland and Austria. It was a good idea to send songs which gonna be loved by people. The reason of this gap is that people from jury are always trying to be like "OMG, Ukraine sounds so fresh! And Poland and Austria sound so 90th!". Oh, please, guys! Why some songs can't be just FUN! Of course polish song is from the deep 90th, but that was the point you missed. Yes, you missed it. Because people didn't. There are millions of people less snob than you and can admit that the song touches. And many of them (like me) love music from 80-90ths. That's why Poland is number 3. And the same about Austria.
Now about Polish diaspora... Guys, are you serious?! How could you possibly say this about Poland and didn't say anything about Ukraine. Hello!!! The song is half in Turkish! Look around yourself which country you wouldn't be from, and that's the answer why Ukraine took 2nd place in televoting. Muslim woman totally covered in fully closed dress crying about nazism to arabic music! How do you think, who voted?
Kirkorov is right about reducing jury influence, but I have better idea how to deal with it. Jury has to give not points, but coefficients to the songs. Let's say it would be done this way:
1st place (instead of 12 points) 1,5
2) 1,4
3) 1,3
4) 1,25
5) 1,2
6) 1,15
7) 1,1
8) 1,05
Then the middle coefficient counts and multiplies to the televoting points.
example: the country got middle coefficient 1.2, televoting summary 200 points, 200*1.2=240 points in total. voilà!
So we decrease "neighborhood voting" effect, and jury doesn't decide EVERYTHING anymore.
Different artist Malta was my winner that year. Malta always gets few televotes because it doesnt have neighboors or because people dont take it into account when it comes to voting
Australia was soo close! Then when I saw the article Australia would've won the old system I'm like argh! Though I do understand this system. Actually I knew in televotes..Australia wouldn't get as high as there's ppl in Europe who don't understand Australia competing, based on that Australia did better than I thought. I didn't expect Poland to get higher points in the televote than Australia though. If Australia came 3rd in televotes, would Australia have won? I mean Poland definitely preformed well, but based on the song itself. I don't know the specifics on the jury voting..But I agree it should be done in isolation. And they shouldn't really be allowed to discuss it with each other as that would influence their decision. The thing is though no matter how they change the system, ppl will always have something to say. And deciding who wins is a battle between logical vs emotional and ppl have different opinions between those.
Really? I was wondering about that so the jury isn't at the venue itself? Yeah they should get headphones :/
I just didn't understand the final... I hoped Australia would win and tbh I don't like Jamala's song very much. In my opinion Sweden and Lithuani are totally overrated and Serbia and Spain totally underrated. I also don't understand how we could get ranked last again! Last year we really deserved it because the sing wasn't good at all but Jamie Lee did a great job and I don't know if it's because of her Japanese fashion style or the song or the political sutuation of Germany right now, but we didn't deserve last place!
I really liked Jamie-Lee's song, and she was sooo cute, I personally loved her Decora/Fairy-Kei fashion; I voted for her! I also loved Germany's song last year too...I don't know why people like Germany...but don't give up you guys won it not too long ago😌 (from Australia)
im more annoyed of the televote more then the jury, Czech republic with 0 points from the televote actually pissed me off
The only thing I thought is maybe they need to change the way they present the Top 10 on screen..it did start to make sense as they were going through it, but e.g maybe after saying which country is the 10th put 10th on the screen as I found it hard to remember the ranking only towards the end. Or split the screen maybe one section jury, the other televote? Something to make it easier to follow
If juries don't exist it will be a eastern countries song contest. I feel if they exclude juries votes some countries might withdraw the competition
And aren't you going to say nothing about Spain and Barei?
+Rh K
they are gay thats why
+SOZE KAISER What is the connection between their homosexuality and my question? :-|
Rh K
everything
+SOZE KAISER OK.
Rh K
no seriously, Spain got screwed by both jurys and fans so thats why they didnt talk about it
I think the jury system they have now is excellent BUT BUT BUT the juries need to be FAIR and that's the only difference I would make. A couple of people that should check the jury votes before they count and ask why and how.
Also, my country ( Belgium ) gave no points to Russia because the song sucks.. That's what a jury member said on Belgian television. And since we gave Russia only 4 points or something like that in the televote Belgium agrees
Markstubation01 yes I saw it earlier! THANK YOU very much, we won't forget it.
Markstubation01 hah well this year we gave you 16 points which isn't too bad either.. For some reason we gave the 12 to poland w.t.f
+Orlando Quin Yes, they don't need to get rid of the juries or make them less than 50%, they just need to do a better job of ensuring the results are fair and independent. There needs to be more oversight of jurors who are chosen and making sure the rules are adhered to and there's no collusion and no relationships between jurors and entrants that could result in bias.
I'm not entirely sure how it would be implemented but something like that needs to happen.
+Orlando Quin At least the Russian song wasn't as dated as yours. Belgium was '70s disco music with also some copy off of "Another One Bites the Dust". And the title "What's the Pressure?" is dumb.
+Jo Brock well if Belgium reaches the final it's always top 10 and ye it was outdated but Laura made it look good by having a killer performance .. otherwise she wouldn't be third ( close to second ) in her semi final
I'm gutted it's all over for another year :(
to have 5 jurors in the same room unsupervised is asking for trouble as the Russian episode quite clearly showed, should the jury vote be examined and even vetoed when it clearly is suspect as happened with some this year ? I don't know what % voting effect they should have is difficult to say, I think this year's result was very good for the contest in the long term and I don't even like the winner but I dislike the manufactured Scandinavian pop sound even more
I think there were many viewers who didn't vote for Australia because they considered Australia should not have been in the contest. It was the best song, the best artist and this was recognised by the juries all over Europe.
I'm satisfied with the juries this year, they at least save Czech Republic from being last :/
+Maryam Aksal Only because of that?
+Maryam Aksal Now I understand why Turkey decided not to participate in the Eurovision Song Contest. Jury hurt Poland for the third year in a row...
+Shamanka Ilona It was better to have both the juries and televote :P both saved some good songs
All of the ex Yugoslav countries nearly qualified!!!!
1. Serbia and Croatia got through, just in 10th.
2. Macedonia was unluckiest. 8th on televote on 11th on jury - 11th overall.
3. Bosnia were 8th on televote but 14th on jury and 11th overall.
4. Montenegro shockingly came in 10th on the jury but the televoters had sense and ranked them near last... 13th overall.
5. Slovenia were 10th on the jury but almost last on the televote... 14th overall!!!!
I do agree that the jury should have 50% contribution but can they at least be supervised or something?
A good and very honest review from you guys. I was so disappointed by the political element to the final winner. The jury vote needs to be completely reworked or it could destroy our beloved Eurovision.
Well, 17 countries didn't give anything to Ukraine, And to me russian song is really 13-th place or less, all the votes were for perfomance. And we have a song contest. After Fenix, Heroes and Euphoia, how could "thunder and lightning it's getting exiting" win?
+RadioLA Besides, if we speak about fairness of jury: in russian jury was Anastasia Stotskaja, whose producer is (was?) Fillip Kirkorov. Is that fair? But she was discualified for posting her opinion in periscope.
+RadioLA I agree with most jury decidions this year, seems like they were really judjing well (as a whole) and right things. I agree with Poland one of the last, with Austria one of the last, with Australia and Ukrain first.
+RadioLA Jamala stood out not only because of the theme of her song, but in general, she was alike nobody (meanwhile everybody was discauusing like this perfomance was alike Beyonce in 2011, this was like last year, this song is like that song and so on), she was the most emotional and emotion causing.
It's slightly astonishing that in screenshot of movies "Our bottom 3" and "Who did the juries hurt most" Michał Szpak appears.
And I agree with Chris about Polish results.
Michal from Poland is amazing, what is wrong with older sounding songs, why do we have to have up to date sounding songs, if i want modern I'd go to the charts, I want different.
I know people disagree with the Jurys but they are needed. I cant speak for other countries but in the UK for the past 3 years our televotes have given 12-10pts to either Lithuania or Poland showing that its pretty obvious the only people voting during eurovision here are the Lithuanian and polish people that's moved here. The jurys help so we dont have the same result every year.
Yes, who said there wasn't an immigrant problem in the UK? This is enough evidence.
+dancingtoelectro It only depicts that UK people don't really care for voting in ESC. Polish and Lithuanian people are still minorities there, if more UK people voted, the results would be different.
Oh, right, and when the UK jury gave 12 points to Georgia it improved confidence in the voting from Grest Britain? I'm neither Polish nor Lithuanian but I would rather prefer these countries picking up votes because thousand people were bothered to express their opinion as opposed to five jurers making a joke
Yeah obviously our Jury has to be looked at as well.
I just understand why they're needed and when they are done correctly they work.
i think georgia did well in uk because independent rock is getting more mainstream and without the juries countries like Czech Republic would do well when they deserve much better ranking
+Antony Winter ? If there were no juries Czech Republic would have gotten NUL points lol
+Orlando Quin I meant wouldn't sorry
Wouldn't *
I agree about the juries. I don't think that lowering the power of the juries will do as much as changing the way they work. I would prefer them to be separated in different rooms and that no conversation whatsoever can happen between jurors when they are judging. Also, the type of jurors that are chosen should be changed. These should be people that now how music works like educated composers and musicians...not just past national final participants that may not write their own songs or anything.
~ For Poland ~
Tele Voting:
12 from: Austria, Belgium
10 from: Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Sweden, Netherlands, United Kingdom
8 from: Hungary, Ukraine
7 from: Czech Republic, France, San Marino
6 from: Belarus, Bulgaria, Lithuania
5 from: Albania, Denmark, Finland, Latvia, Russia, Spain, Switzerland
4 from: Croatia, Georgia, Israel, Slovenia
3 from: Azerbaijan, Greece
2 from: Cyprus, F.Y.R. Macedonia
1 from: Armenia, Estonia
~ 3rd place /26 countries
Jury Voting:
3 from: Latvia
2 from: Azerbaijan
1 from: Montenegro, Norway
~ 25th place /26 countries
After seeing the grand finals voting I came across three things.
1. The juries can feel forced to vote for political reasons. Hard to cope with.
2. Not enough TV camera time on those who got the best televoting.
3. The results after old voting system is not the same... Including, better to see what the public has voted for per country.
The old way of Eurovision is no longer existing. It seems to go for a TV-production in line with more focus on excitement.
A hard choice to decide wether public or jury votes should be presented first.
Petra seemed very forced to hear the votes from the presenters. But she did very great.
This years winner is not the winner. The results differ too much. This year, you decide the winner.:)
In my opinion there should be 50 jury members per country who are a mix of music professionals and normal people and have an equal split of genders and a variety of age. Also they shouldn't be allowed to listen to the songs before judging and shouldn't know which country it is singing throughout, and they should judge in complete isolation to achieve the fairest possible score. This will avoid all the political voting the juries do particularly between Armenia and Azerbaijan.
The EBU really need to have a look at the Jury's because mistakes like the ones made this year can't really go on. Roll on Kiev 2017! (Even though I really didn't like Jamala's song) ;)
I watched eurovision at home and I have to be honest I didn't pay much attention to cyprus and serbia only because Dami Im killed it and I guess it they got lost
Czech Republic is not voted, because it hasn't "vote-for-me friend zone" as many other countries have.
I think Malta did well because it's the type of song juries (and I, lol) tend to like. Female Maltese solo vocalists do have a history of doing Eurovision very well. I completely get the appeal of the song. I think it suffered in the televote because in a year with so many female solo vocalists it got forgotten.
In my opinion is this tipe of music like (Ukraine) that Eurovision needs more and NOT like the Russia's one.
I, too, thought the juries were to keep a check on the public but they are actually screwing up the results. I don't think increasing their numbers will help. It is too difficult to make them honest & we can't allow them to derail the public vote again. The competition is for the public, not the juries. Their political bias is unforgivable. Enough! The juries should be scrapped completely.
What if EBU will replace juries by the Eurovision fans?
Who here is what I think ;
Well I'm my opinion if Dami I'm would've represented a European country instead of Australia she would've come higher in the televote and would have won overall. I say this because many people and some friends told me oh I loved Australia but I don't want them to win because they're not in Europe and because of this they didn't vote for her, so yeah if she would've represented a European country the turn out would have probably been different
Overrated: SWEDEN!
Underrated or deserved better places: Spain, Austria, Israel, Serbia, Czech republic
btw this situation about juries i think that has been happening since long time ago...just with the new system we can see it even clearer...
+Mrempoleon100 I wonder if some felt obligated to give Sweden votes just for being the host.
+Mrempoleon100 underrated: HUNGARY!!!!!!!
Jo Brock i think is because he is a mix of ed sheran/justin bieber or something like that...
lifelikejosie sure it was...also deserved a better place
+Mrempoleon100 Overrated : Netherlands
now everyone understand why Turkey lest the contest. .. the jury is awful. .. and I guess eurovision need no more jury votes anymore
They need to stop jury voting
Luka Bogdanović I totally agree . Actually I wanted to Ukraine win but this kind of winning is not fair. Russia got people votes all over the worlds . and Poland did amazing job bur jury shoot him down..
Jury is awful because they balance this huge unfair advantage that Turkey gets through diaspora voting? Gotcha...
+Yasin Olgun Poland 25th and Serbia 23rd, they should be top 10
Nutzername92a Turkish diaspora are in only 3 country Germany France and Netherlands. And jury votes are in everywhere. By the way it's not about it. If you watch again in 2009 and 2010 we got 12 points from all Diaspora Countries. And 2012 too we got top points ..
The juries are still needed as a balance, otherwise songs like Poland's would win. The juries take out a possible Taylor Swift/ Justin Bieber factor. ( Yes, I'm going to get some hate but I'm 49...). Liked the scoring this year,it was much more exciting and surprising. My biggest shock was how poorly Spain did ( again!) in both televoting and juries. So much buzz and I was at the Tele2 party and wow, did she get applause. I think if she left out that staged fall, she would have done better. LIked your cameoes, WIll and Deban with Petra!!
+Bart Staelens Thanks Bart! Sometimes one can not estimate the power of the televote. Does the televote reflect the diverse nature of the audience or do many viewers vote for 'jokes'? The televote saves Austria which was a fan favorite, but killed Spain. Poor Spain, they do send good songs ( esp. since 2010 )but never get rewarded. I don't think it's the 'curse' of the big 5 either ( France made a big comeback this year).
The UK was robbed in the Jury and Televote I do not understand that a song that was in the bookies Top 10 on the night, performing in 25th, a prime performing position to come 24th.
24th this song is no Electro Velvet, it is much, much, much more superior than that I completely disagree with Poraig about the UK's votes being underserved (not towards Georgia, I'm talking about points awarded to the UK). in short the UK deserved a Top 10 finish that night and I think that the UK was robbed point blank.
Lol no. In no world did Joe & Jake deserve to be in the top 10.
Sure, their song was far superior to Electro Velvet. And they did far better than Electro Velvet, so be happy :D
+Nutzername92a I still think they were robbed and Sweden coming Top 5 is the biggest crime of Eurovision this year
+Liam Alan Lindsay The UK was in the bookies always between 20 and 30, look at youtubes, it was even always lower than Denmark, who did not even make it to the final. It was Spain who has been robbed. Love from France.
Russia got zero from 21, Ukraine 17 countries. Interesting.
At what minute they talked about Barei?