When one messes too much in something odds are that you ruin it. And I have the feeling that’s what’s happening to Eurovision. I find it harder to find the similarities between words “Song contest” - “song” when singing and music is Les and less relevant, but rather the spectacle and “contest”, when certain countries often get the same bad places
Why not using tempo instead as a guide? Create low, mid & high tempo categories as rule. Producers decide how many of which tempo they want in a row & rotation ( i.e. high- mid- low- low, high, low …). Each year, put each country‘s song into one of the three tempo categories. Draw each countries in first or second semi-final. Then draw the final order within these categories. So you have both curated and chance playing a part in the 3 shows & that might make it fairer? I hope I’m making sense 🤔 My apologies if I’m confusing people … 🌻
no i totally agree, i actually had the same idea myself. I guess they could try and objectively do that by going for BPM or some other metric for measuring the speed of the song? the only risk with that is that you still might get all 3-4 favourites in one half of the show
Not even tempo, but there are certainly songs that can be grouped together e.g. girl bops. Divide the final up in quarters and then randomly assign each song in a group to a quarter. That way they don't end up on top of each other and the energy is consistent. I'm hoping that this producers choice will achieve that
I think it's naive to say that the producers might "right the wrongs" by putting countries in a better position if they've been unlucky. You talked about that for the semifinal running order as well, but I think we saw pretty clearly that this is not a priority for them at all. I think this is a step towards in a few years doing away with the draw altogether (except for the host, or so I hope). I think this system opens up to a lot more criticism, when you disagree that the producers put your favourite in the first half, instead it being a random draw. At the end of the day, half the songs have to be in the first half, so some people will always be disappointed. I think it's better to have some objective and impersonal way to decide who that should be.
Thank you!! The semi final draws this year make it clear that production does not care about helping out countries with consistent bad luck in the draw or placing songs in the lineup so they can best stand out.
"except for the host" If there's one slot which shouldn't be subjected to a random draw it should be the host. Just put them in the second spot in the final, solves two problems in one fell swoop.
I've always been confused about the taboo of not placing heavy hitting songs too early? Why do they need to be stacked on top of each other at the ends of the halves instead of spreading them out? Cause right now it feels like the energy builds and then collapses instead of it being consistent.
It's why you put popular songs/artists near the end of a concert/festival, making sure people don't leave before the end (if that is physically possible otherwise). Casual TV viewers will still change channels and switch to Eurovision to see only certain acts if they can't be bothered with the ones they are not interested in. And the spectators in the final probably also won't leave before the end so it is kinda strange, but ok. It would actually make most sense for EBU to organize the running order without the draw, but so many delegations would be pissed. It seems that this is a step in that direction.
@@rima8111 Of course it does. You can't start on a high, and you can't keep hitting highs. The highs come at a few key moments, and then mostly at the end of the show. This formula is used in entertainment across the board.
The 'bad' 2022 second half was a producer's choice too by the way and had little to do with the draw. It would have made perfect sense to split up the final quarter with heavy hitters such as Sweden, Serbia and UK and mix it up with the third quarter, even moving Moldova to two spots sooner. Estonia as the final song was the best decision though. I am not so enthusiastic about the change but we will have to wait and see how it will be implemented.
I don't really have a strong opinion on the changes themselves, but I do think it is a bit of a bad look that this year introduces not one, not two, but THREE changes that more or less benefit Sweden this year. They're performing first (so they arguably benefit most from the voting time change), they are an automatic qualifier (so they benefit from the additional exposure in the semis), and now the running order is given to the producers which, incidentally, happen to be the Swedish producers this year, who now have all the freedom to put the right songs after Sweden so it stands out most. Add to that all the lingering resentment from last year and I see a lot of potential for this to spark some massive shitstorms down the line.
What I'm missing is some clarity about how the Producer's Choice countries will be split up between halves. Surely they must be split 6/7 so as to not distrupt the 1st/2nd half draw? I.e. not having a weird situation where a country drawing 1st half performs at number 15 because it has 8 Producer's Choices preceding it. I suppose it goes without saying but the EBU is weird sometimes😅
i know this is an unpopular opinion, but if there is going to be a producer-led running order, the producers should just optimize the whole thing and decide the running order without the random chance encounter lotto. this system seems needlessly cruel to those acts who draw the first half.
While I understand why people are a bit grumpy I think this is a good change. Like you mentioned it means that songs of similar genres can be better spread out to help all the songs shine and make for a more entertaining show. Some songs have to be in the first half, it just depends on how well the producers balance fairness and making a good show.
How are we supposed to trust producers in terms of giving more fair running orders to some countries when we have, for example, Czechia getting 14, 3, 1, 14 running orders in 2018 - 2023? Or Albania getting 2nd spot in 2019 & 2021 finals (plus 10th spot last year but right after Loreen) and 2nd one again in the semi of 2024? So, producers will keep on doing what they usually do but now they have even more freedom in this. And look, they already started this change with 13 producers choices. Could've had just 25 of the straight away then.
@@ESCTomno, it's because they are snobs that think they are above everyone else, that only they know how to do things right, and thus get their disgusting hands to mold ESC to be theirs first and foremost
@@jbdloucks yes, changes made to obviously benefit the same countries every year while making others suffer should be praised. Let me guess, you're from a nordic or big 5 country ain't ya
@@jbdloucks Changing rules "just because they can" is actually really obnoxious, and toxic too... And sure, you get a winner, but for example last year the totally wrong one. End of.
another solution for the sake of fairness and flow of songs would be putting the songs in different categories by genre/style, like ballad, girlbop, etc; then design the running order keeping these categories in mind and finally have the songs drawn according to the design but randomly. (eg: the producers decided ballads should occupy the 2nd, 7th, 16th and 23rd spots) obviously the decision of what song belongs to which category would be a little arbitrary, but it's definitely more fair than having the betting odds as base to design the running order.
It's either a piece of TV entertainment or a musical competition. It certainly appears to be the former. How can we take it seriously as a serious contest when a countries chance of doing well is seriously compromised by the producers influence.
I think my only concern is if this change will it make the comment section more toxic? People complaining if their county is repeatedly put very early but now not by luck but being controlled by a shadowy board of executives. (the semis already seemed to prioritize bigger countries in a way) Or on the flip side, trying to de-legitimize a contest winner because they got a better spot. ...perhaps i should care less about these things 😅
@@ESCTomif people like continue to not just excuse but incentivize decisions like these that are obviously being made only to keep benefiting the same countries every year, yes it will get more toxic
In terms of all the stuff we’ve seen in the past couple of years this one doesn’t seem too bad on paper, but I’ve quickly decided I really dislike it. As other people are saying, it just seems to be a potential to add more fuel to the fire of conspiracy theories - especially for the casual viewer, who are the largest demographic. The harder it is to explain the rules of how it works, the more it’s going to seem like something shady is going on. It all feels so corporate and against everything Eurovision is supposed to be. Eurovision has always been flawed, I don’t dispute that, and of course some countries are just naturally going to end up with better running slots than others. However now it just feels like they’re trying to funnel us towards the ‘correct’ winner every time, which they think will be good for the brand. It feels less like a contest, and more like a product. And this is more of a personal concern, but I suspect the more it feels like the whole thing is becoming ‘rigged’ with a set outcome, the louder the demands will grow to scrap the jury vote - which will then undermine any promotion of quality within the contest and dampen its reputation (just look at the 2000s), and a whole negative feedback loop will perpetuate downhill. Sweden was my winner last year and I was so happy Loreen won, but now honestly I’m kind of wishing they hadn’t won because in another country they likely wouldn’t be trying to alter the formula like this. Which isn’t how it should be.
This system does help prevent the 'sacrificial lamb' situation we've had over the past few years for the opener. They've all been songs that had reasonable potential (not necessarily winners, but solid Top 10ers) and were all thwarted by being the opener. Little weird they've brought it in in a year where they've have the opener sorted already! At first, it seems like it might be worse but for the sake of the show, it might be better.
The only thing this change will do is to increase to doubts about the contest. Some countrys already had a reputation of being jury favorites, now it will be much worse. Dumb change, maybe im wrong but doubt it
My honest opinion I think they should put every countries flag on an orange hidden and release a monkey to find them. Whatever order he picks is the shows order. I’d tune in to that and far fairer unless the monkey is a highly trained Swedish one 🤔
my understanding is that it's the producers from the host broadcaster but then also there are some producers who are consistent for every year of the show, the main one being Martin
I see your point and in the world where the focus was a good show it would make sense. But the focus is also have big western countries favourably treated and allow small eastern countries equal treatment only if their song is a huge favourite. It’s the same logic as oppressed groups having to work 140% harder to get the same treatment as those in the favoured class (insert gender, colour of skin, wealth, minority group, immigrants, sexual orientation or whatever else in the first category). You’ll be fairly treated only if you are exceptional isn’t in the spirit of United by Music. If the focus is devide by tempo, staging etc., diversity - I’d be more in favour of the draw. I just don’t trust producers not to abuse extra power to give more favour to the rich and further screw the poor.
yep i totally agree but thats capitalism. if we want it to be fairer, we would need the contest to be publicly funded from a central source. even then, some countries would be contributing more. so an alternative is that all countries pay the same, but then small countries would complain they were paying so much
@@ESCTom you’re right. I wonder if national broadcasters being the main sponsors is something that will need to change with time as it is not sustainable. Examples of France and Germany where public broadcasters have dropping viewing figures is not a good sign. Maybe have all country broadcasters bid for rights? Public funding? Fan funding? National funding? EU funding? Mixed funding? I want Eurovision to outlive me but I also want it to grow as a force of unity.
If the producers wanted this much control, why didn't they just go all the way and have 100% producer decided running order? With this new system, they can still stiff songs that draw 1st half and blame the draw without having to take responsibility, whilst also having more power to put the favourites somewhere, well, favourable. Feels like a fudge that's a positive for the producers but of little to no benefit for the participants. (Also, even if Switzerland or Croatia draw 1st half, you can bet your house on them not being placed in spots 2-7...)
I wonder if you try and make less cuts in your videos like Eurovision Histories does if they would be easier to edit - Just don't want you to get burnt out!
I think they should first classify the songs in genders: pop, dance, ballads, rocks or others. Then, putting them one of each style after the other, to contrast between them, and if there were only 2 or 3 songs of folk or different genres, place them every 7 or 8 spots. I think that would be a great way of doing it in Eurovision.
I dont know if anyone knows the answer but if a Country draws the first half do they have to go between 1 and 13 or can they go 14th, 15th or maybe 16th if most of your Producers Choice is thrown in the 1st half
First half will be 1 - 13 of course. 6 of the producer's choice will be in it as well (as Sweden takes up a spot already), while 7 will be in the second half, meaning 14 - 26.
Hi, you said that Eurovision is an entertainment show, to be honest it's not. It's not called Eurovision Entertainment Contest, it's the Eurovision Song Contest. It's about singing. That was my first thing. Now the other thing is some news. I don't know if you heard it. I saw an interview with Petra Mede where she was asked if ABBA will appear in the final. She said that she can't give any specifics about it but you could say that ABBA will show up in one way or another either live onstage, on a screen or via link. She didn't say specifically those three, that is just my thoughts on it. My idea was for A-Teens formerly known as ABBA-Teens before ABBA was going to sue them for using their name. A-Teens would sing an ABBA medley that includes Waterloo and end the medley with Thank You For The Music while ABBA are being hoisted down to the stage. Just to get their standing ovations that they deserve. But I don't think that is the way they will do it.
Il be straight up - I’m just so sick of Sweden calling the shots at Eurovision- last massive change when jury /public votes were separated was decided by Sweden, now this producers choice . It may make good tv because ESC is a tv show after all as Tom has said but it doesn’t sit right with me . I’m on the fence on if producers will be fair or not
I don't like the change of voting in 2016. I'm fine with the system itself, but am salty about the way the points are presented. Who cares which jury gives how many points to whom if they are supposed to be neutral and independent from their country? What makes the points presenting interesting are questions about which country votes in which way. I want to find out the detailed public votes during the exciting show, not afterwards in a spreadsheet 😒 (I know all pros and cons about changing the way points are presented)
.....and giving the favourites better slots is disadvantaging the rest. Just because they are high in the odds doesn't mean they should be given a greater chance to win.....seems a little unfair.
They're so close to a good idea here, SO close... choosing the running order allocation is a great change, love that for the producers, but think about this for a second: Gimlo's choice! Eh? What do you think? Genius, right? Would make the whole thing a LOT better if you ask Gimlo
Looking at the reactions at eurovisionworld, most people don't seem to be happy with this change. I also think the solution is rather meh. Somehow I have the impression that always only the symptoms of the running order are being combated instead of thinking about what could be done so that every participant has the same chance. A few years ago I already thought it would make more sense to expand the song contest to several evenings. Even for the ASC (which was adapted from the ESC and also produced by Swedish producers) they managed it well, so that despite 56 participants there were never more than 11 per evening. In my opinion, at the ESC there are already too many in the semi-finals. If there would be more several preliminary rounds, it would also be possible to make a more accepted and fairer situation with the automatic qualifiers (e.g. they could host the qualifying rounds, qualify automatically there for the semi-finals, but then still have to qualify for the grand final in the semi-finals).
Est - ce que quelqu'un peut m'expliquer en français les règles de l'Eurovision 2024 et que veux dire tout ces classements que l'on voit ? Un monent le pays est premier , puis un autre moment il est 7 ème et ensuite 3 ème etc ..... Alors si quelqu'un parle bien français merci de m'expliquer les règles. Tout les commentaires , les réactions, les interview sont en anglais .
I hate that there are so many producers’ choice balls. What’s the point of only giving 6 acts first and 6 acts second half? It makes the first half pick seem like even more of a ‘punishment’. I would’ve split it 9-9-7 (with the 7 being producers’ choice).
The simplest solution is to use the semifinals classification to decide the order. Top 5's go in second half, Bottom 5's go in first half. Since the semifinals are televote-only, this makes the final be viewer-centric in its order. Meanwhile, juries can help out those in the first half, since juries tend to be less affected by running order. There, problem solved.
@@ESCTom They would just need to say who is top 5 and bottom 5, the order would get scrambled within the halves by producer's choice. It would be similar to how San Remo works, but less specific since there would be 10 top 5 acts plus the 6 automatic qualifiers. It also would give more power to televoters in the semi's as they would be deciding the half in addition to qualification. I can also see one or two of the bottom 5's doing well in the final as they can stand out in the first half if they are by far better than others around them and just got unlucky in the semi's.
I haven't read the comments below so I apologize if this has been said already but 2022 really suffered from juries in the semis. No televote semi would allow dross like Systur or Marius Bear to make the final.
I really don't like this. It feels ambivalent to me. Either stick to the old system with 1st or 2nd half balls being drawn, or give the producers the complete freedom to arrange the running order as they want it to be. I can also see a system in where the running order slot of the past 5 or 10 years is going to be decisive whether you are in the 1st or 2nd half the next year. If so, they have to sign you a their data-analyst 😉
Giving producers more control is just going to mean that smaller countries and less hyped countries are going to get more consistently screwed. As we've already seen with the semifinals, the producers have absolutely zero interest in anything other than ratings. Giving a country a better spot just because they've previously had bad spots is not something they will ever do.
This could also be a pragmatic decision for a totally different reason: staging! If multiple countries have brought really ambitious staging packages, then the producers will need more control to place those "big staging" songs around ad breaks, host filler bits etc. Thinking along the lines of Loreen's panini press last year or Spain's moon in 2021 that needed extra time to be set up on stage
Could the argument also be made that countries shouldn't come with staging that absolutely requires additional time? Seems unfair to me that if you come with big staging you basically can't be put on until later in the show?
When it was first announced I was, I was a little skeptical, but willing to be open-minded, and after a couple of days I agreed that it was probably the right move. Basically for the same reasons as you mention about similar songs being separated etc etc. The only thing I still don't like is that this seems a bit of a messy compromise between giving producers more control and having some randomness. I wouldn't be surprised if soon it goes 100% producer choice, and tbh, I wouldn't be against it.
i actually think its easier if you still have half random. you have a base thing to work off of, plus it helps counter accusations of rigging/fixing, even if its just a bit
I don't like this. This is just another way for the producers to tilt the outcome toward their preferred acts. There are ways to ensure a nice flow while doing so in a random way that doesn't let the producers play favorites.
Because as in other years, it was the winner for the wrong reasons. Last winning positions from 2008: 24, 20, 22, 19, 17, 18, 11, 10, 21, 11, 22, 12, 24, 12, 9. So, in 15 years with two semifinals, the first half has won 6 times, and second half 9 times, but in the last 9 editions the first half has had all its victories. Also, in 2023 we saw a one-digit position winning for the first time in 19 years. To date, only positions 2, 16, 25 and 26 haven't won.
I hope the "death slot" will go to a country that will draw first half. Imagine drawing "producer's choice" and being hopeful of a good slot only to be put 2nd... I think it would rub the country in question the wrong way. At least by drawing first half the country would be prepared of performing in the first half, while the producer's choices don't know which half they're gonna be in. 8:15 Actually, since 2016, Serbia has ALWAYS been in the first half of the semi final. Talk about bad luck.
This stinks. It’s still a competition, and this gives producers more scope to influence that competition. Just as we know they aready do on reality TV shows. Why was this not announced at the same time as the vote from the start change? It seems clear to me that the two go hand in hand. If Bjorkman gives a song a favourable juxtaposition, now it will instantly get loads of televotes. At the very least he should produce a statement explaining why he has drawn songs in certain positions.
My big beef of the day is that you lumped Monika Liu as one of the ‘sad heavy downbeat’ songs. She had one of the lightest, most uplifting songs of 2022.
But in 2022 they could have broken up the 'gloomy' songs by sticking Moldova in the middle of them, but they chose not to do so. Therefore, I am very sceptical of the producer's choice initiative, it just leaves it open to give them more power to potentially favour certain broadcasters. Unless, they put in a caveat where any one country can not be put in the same half more than 3 years running or can not be placed in positions 2 and 3 more than once in a five year period. Yes, it makes it more complicated, but would add more credence to me. I'm not overly enamoured with the voting lines opening straight away, either. I know it was announced pre-draw, but this does favour songs that are teeny-bopper friendly in the first half, (Sweden is very teeny-bopper friendly, move along nothing to see here), allowing young kids to vote in the first hour and then probably be in bed by the mid-way point. What they could bring back, is reversing the song order in the reprises like they tried in the early 2000s. I think it was in this period that Türkiye won from slot 4, so that would help negate the death-slots situation.
90% of the viewers don’t care how the running order will be decided, they are mostly concerned with being able to stay awake long enough to see their own country perform. Also, why are the first half considered bad? During the first 10 songs you are still focused but on the second half you are making toilet breaks, fetching things in the kitchen every other song (especially on the slow ones so you don’t accidentally fall asleep) and starts to think it will never end while it drags on and on forever until it’s finally time for the jury’s vote.
I hope you're right, because if I was one of the producers I think I will use these "choices" to give at least decent slots in the running order to countries who get unlucky in the recent years (such as Serbia and Albania) or countries who don't qualify very often (Georgia, Ireland, Latvia or San Marino for example). But I'm afraid producers won't think like that and do everything for viewership and money.
I personally don't mind producer's choice. Given the volume of voters, I think the most popular song has the best chance of winning anyway. I also think that it's better that performances are arranged in such a way that the show does flow better. I get that people are upset about the lack of randomness and fairness, but I don't think it's so bad.
Why have 6 first half and 6 second half then? Just put them all as producers choice then. It'll be horrible if a country who doesn't want a first half position gets producer choice and still gets the dreaded second position so why not just give them all producer choice because before there's that sense and feel of hoping not getting the first half or hoping to get the second half. Now it's hoping to get second half or producer choice but also hoping the producers don't put me in the first half. Two stresses now for the artists and yes some stress over it like how we fans stress over it. Either keep the first half second half or give all producer choice. Doesn't make sense at all.
@@AnonTripleagree, having 12 countries first and half and others as producers choice makes no sense, either leave it as it was or let them all be producers choice
I just want them to put all countries in the first and second semi with all having to qualify for the grand final instead of having these "Big Five" that always make it in, no matter if their song is good or not. Then just have a pot from which one random person just picks enough for the first semi and everyone else ends up in the second semi. End of story! Through this no judges will have their fingers in the order or the draw and all the talents will have a equal chance based on luck. It would be the fairest way to go in my opinion and nobody could moan then that whoever choose whatever.
That will never happen, losing a big 5 country in the semi final will lead to reduced ratings as the highest Eurovision ratings are in these countries and if the big 5 are made to perform in the semi finals their broadcasters will want to pay less money, meaning other countries would have to pay more. Which would lead to the withdrawal of many smaller countries who are struggling with finances as it is
For me, there is no running order system that will ever be 100% fair or without "questions". I think this is worth to at least try out, and see how it works in the end. Like you, I trust the Swedish producers that they're being as fair as they can to everyone involved. I'm sure they'll reflect afterwards on if this new draw is one that they'll continue or if this did't work out how they intended to make the most dynamic show.
Let's make it clear, the 2016 change was the worse change that could have happened. Australia was the best song that year, however because the Europeans don't like Australia, it took the win away. European trolls come at me!
I like how Sweden isn't afraid to change the rules when they think an aspect isn't working. It really shows which countries understand the contest and which are just hosting because they got lucky the year before
yup, i totally agree. they arent just phoning it in, they are trying to progress the contest. that 2016 change of splitting the vote was absolutely amazing
I totally disagree - it's not about "not being afraid to change", but wanting to bend the contest to their own wishes & likes, which is just plain wrong, IMO.
Ever heard of don't fix if it ain't broken? MF has been crap the last 10 years so what exactly makes them qualified to do those changes to the ESC? They just want Sweden to win every year and don't give a rat's ass about anything else
I completely disagree. This system is much more complicated than needed and completely non transparent. Similar rules with those that make Melodifestivalen (Swedish Eurovision qualification) unfair and raise suspicions that it can be fixed.
If this "producer choice" made iolanda presenting Grito at 14th of the 2nd half...im glad they updated this choice! Its best spot ever! TELEVOTE for Portugal at 1st Semifinal please! 🇵🇹😎🇵🇹
I have more of a producers eye when it comes to this sort of thing so I have no problem with this change. Of course there’s going to be a lot of fans moaning about it bc they don’t like change in general.
Or because some people like fairness, or because some people can see this is just a change to further benefit the same countries every year or because some people don't worship Sweden's boots with their toungues like you do
@@KylieWilson so we should make it more unfair? Just say you only want the same countries to succeed every year and shut your trap about "producers eye", better than pretending that much like the EBU ypu aren't blatantly xenophobic and purposefully wanna see some countries get screwed
Typical Sweden, a system much more complicated than needed and completely non transparent. Similar rules with those that make Melodifestivalen unfair and raise suspicions that it can be fixed. It is good to try to please the viewers but one needs to remember that Eurovision is a competition and it has to be a fair one. Most viewers would be disappointed if they thought that there is an attempt to fix the results of the competition.
When one messes too much in something odds are that you ruin it. And I have the feeling that’s what’s happening to Eurovision. I find it harder to find the similarities between words “Song contest” - “song” when singing and music is Les and less relevant, but rather the spectacle and “contest”, when certain countries often get the same bad places
literally the FIFA-ification of esc 💀💀
Its no more about who sing an ave the best song,but more about the performence and the show around it.The sillyer the better
Why not using tempo instead as a guide? Create low, mid & high tempo categories as rule. Producers decide how many of which tempo they want in a row & rotation ( i.e. high- mid- low- low, high, low …). Each year, put each country‘s song into one of the three tempo categories. Draw each countries in first or second semi-final. Then draw the final order within these categories. So you have both curated and chance playing a part in the 3 shows & that might make it fairer?
I hope I’m making sense 🤔 My apologies if I’m confusing people … 🌻
no i totally agree, i actually had the same idea myself. I guess they could try and objectively do that by going for BPM or some other metric for measuring the speed of the song?
the only risk with that is that you still might get all 3-4 favourites in one half of the show
I do wonder, where would you put a song like Ireland? That song changes so dramatically. 😅
Not even tempo, but there are certainly songs that can be grouped together e.g. girl bops. Divide the final up in quarters and then randomly assign each song in a group to a quarter. That way they don't end up on top of each other and the energy is consistent. I'm hoping that this producers choice will achieve that
@@ESCTomLet an AI come up with a good metric.
I think it's naive to say that the producers might "right the wrongs" by putting countries in a better position if they've been unlucky. You talked about that for the semifinal running order as well, but I think we saw pretty clearly that this is not a priority for them at all. I think this is a step towards in a few years doing away with the draw altogether (except for the host, or so I hope). I think this system opens up to a lot more criticism, when you disagree that the producers put your favourite in the first half, instead it being a random draw. At the end of the day, half the songs have to be in the first half, so some people will always be disappointed. I think it's better to have some objective and impersonal way to decide who that should be.
100% agree. I mean. Let’s give Latvia at least a random change to qualify…
Thank you!! The semi final draws this year make it clear that production does not care about helping out countries with consistent bad luck in the draw or placing songs in the lineup so they can best stand out.
"except for the host"
If there's one slot which shouldn't be subjected to a random draw it should be the host.
Just put them in the second spot in the final, solves two problems in one fell swoop.
Definitley don't trust the producers not to listen to their own prefrences and biases and favour certain countries/songs.
Problem is I don't trust the producers to have only the good of the show in mind.
It's just a hunch but I don't trust Martin Österdahl and his team.
This! 💯💯
Exactly. And Christer Björkman even less, if he's still part of the producer team? ;)
Time for Martin to hand over to someone else after this year.
What bothers me is the voting before we see the artists on stage.
100% agree. I really don't understand the logic of this rule change.....
I've always been confused about the taboo of not placing heavy hitting songs too early? Why do they need to be stacked on top of each other at the ends of the halves instead of spreading them out? Cause right now it feels like the energy builds and then collapses instead of it being consistent.
It's why you put popular songs/artists near the end of a concert/festival, making sure people don't leave before the end (if that is physically possible otherwise). Casual TV viewers will still change channels and switch to Eurovision to see only certain acts if they can't be bothered with the ones they are not interested in. And the spectators in the final probably also won't leave before the end so it is kinda strange, but ok. It would actually make most sense for EBU to organize the running order without the draw, but so many delegations would be pissed. It seems that this is a step in that direction.
@@HrvojeBan ok that makes sense from the tv spectacle perspective, but honestly doesn't make sense from an energy perspective.
@@rima8111 Of course it does. You can't start on a high, and you can't keep hitting highs. The highs come at a few key moments, and then mostly at the end of the show. This formula is used in entertainment across the board.
"A lot of artists ... they are there to expose themselves" you say. I thought this was a family show!!!😂
The 'bad' 2022 second half was a producer's choice too by the way and had little to do with the draw. It would have made perfect sense to split up the final quarter with heavy hitters such as Sweden, Serbia and UK and mix it up with the third quarter, even moving Moldova to two spots sooner. Estonia as the final song was the best decision though.
I am not so enthusiastic about the change but we will have to wait and see how it will be implemented.
I don't really have a strong opinion on the changes themselves, but I do think it is a bit of a bad look that this year introduces not one, not two, but THREE changes that more or less benefit Sweden this year. They're performing first (so they arguably benefit most from the voting time change), they are an automatic qualifier (so they benefit from the additional exposure in the semis), and now the running order is given to the producers which, incidentally, happen to be the Swedish producers this year, who now have all the freedom to put the right songs after Sweden so it stands out most. Add to that all the lingering resentment from last year and I see a lot of potential for this to spark some massive shitstorms down the line.
What I'm missing is some clarity about how the Producer's Choice countries will be split up between halves. Surely they must be split 6/7 so as to not distrupt the 1st/2nd half draw? I.e. not having a weird situation where a country drawing 1st half performs at number 15 because it has 8 Producer's Choices preceding it. I suppose it goes without saying but the EBU is weird sometimes😅
Of course it's 6/7, everything else wouldn't make sense.
i know this is an unpopular opinion, but if there is going to be a producer-led running order, the producers should just optimize the whole thing and decide the running order without the random chance encounter lotto. this system seems needlessly cruel to those acts who draw the first half.
i actually think its a little easier if you have some of the places pre-determined. it gives you some starting point to work off of
Can't wait for them to put Serbia in 2nd place in final as well.... :/
that would be ☠️
Not if Albania qualifies, don't worry :D
While I understand why people are a bit grumpy I think this is a good change. Like you mentioned it means that songs of similar genres can be better spread out to help all the songs shine and make for a more entertaining show. Some songs have to be in the first half, it just depends on how well the producers balance fairness and making a good show.
I don’t mind the “producers choice” but I still think that 13 songs are a bit too much, if they put it down to 8 max I think no one would complain
How are we supposed to trust producers in terms of giving more fair running orders to some countries when we have, for example, Czechia getting 14, 3, 1, 14 running orders in 2018 - 2023? Or Albania getting 2nd spot in 2019 & 2021 finals (plus 10th spot last year but right after Loreen) and 2nd one again in the semi of 2024? So, producers will keep on doing what they usually do but now they have even more freedom in this.
And look, they already started this change with 13 producers choices. Could've had just 25 of the straight away then.
Okay but why does Sweden love changing the rules everytime they host? 😅
most of the changes are pretty good though, the 2016 change was one of the best ever 😅. i think its because they are forward thinking
@@ESCTomno, it's because they are snobs that think they are above everyone else, that only they know how to do things right, and thus get their disgusting hands to mold ESC to be theirs first and foremost
Because they can. And none of the changes really warrant any obnoxious whining from the toxic fans. We will still get one winner at the end.
@@jbdloucks yes, changes made to obviously benefit the same countries every year while making others suffer should be praised. Let me guess, you're from a nordic or big 5 country ain't ya
@@jbdloucks Changing rules "just because they can" is actually really obnoxious, and toxic too... And sure, you get a winner, but for example last year the totally wrong one. End of.
another solution for the sake of fairness and flow of songs would be putting the songs in different categories by genre/style, like ballad, girlbop, etc; then design the running order keeping these categories in mind and finally have the songs drawn according to the design but randomly. (eg: the producers decided ballads should occupy the 2nd, 7th, 16th and 23rd spots)
obviously the decision of what song belongs to which category would be a little arbitrary, but it's definitely more fair than having the betting odds as base to design the running order.
I'll wait to see what the final running order is before I decide if I like this change or not 😝
It's either a piece of TV entertainment or a musical competition. It certainly appears to be the former. How can we take it seriously as a serious contest when a countries chance of doing well is seriously compromised by the producers influence.
I still prefer random draw, but I think I prefer this to the halves because I always thought 26 songs were too many for just 2 halves.
I think my only concern is if this change will it make the comment section more toxic? People complaining if their county is repeatedly put very early but now not by luck but being controlled by a shadowy board of executives. (the semis already seemed to prioritize bigger countries in a way) Or on the flip side, trying to de-legitimize a contest winner because they got a better spot.
...perhaps i should care less about these things 😅
is it possible for the comments section to get more toxic? surely its reached maximum capacity by now
@@ESCTomif people like continue to not just excuse but incentivize decisions like these that are obviously being made only to keep benefiting the same countries every year, yes it will get more toxic
@@ESCTom Ok fair point 🤣
@@ESCTom oof don't tempt fate... 😅
When they announced this change, we already knew that we will have very few low pace songs this year.
We have seen that the producers don't care about fairness but more about show flow - Serbia in 2nd in their semifinal this year.
Shouldve been Poland
Semifinal spots are not that important as in the final.
@@rafismusic still, Serbia has been in 2nd or 3rd in r/o in semis for the third yr in a row, its unfair
In terms of all the stuff we’ve seen in the past couple of years this one doesn’t seem too bad on paper, but I’ve quickly decided I really dislike it. As other people are saying, it just seems to be a potential to add more fuel to the fire of conspiracy theories - especially for the casual viewer, who are the largest demographic. The harder it is to explain the rules of how it works, the more it’s going to seem like something shady is going on. It all feels so corporate and against everything Eurovision is supposed to be. Eurovision has always been flawed, I don’t dispute that, and of course some countries are just naturally going to end up with better running slots than others. However now it just feels like they’re trying to funnel us towards the ‘correct’ winner every time, which they think will be good for the brand. It feels less like a contest, and more like a product.
And this is more of a personal concern, but I suspect the more it feels like the whole thing is becoming ‘rigged’ with a set outcome, the louder the demands will grow to scrap the jury vote - which will then undermine any promotion of quality within the contest and dampen its reputation (just look at the 2000s), and a whole negative feedback loop will perpetuate downhill. Sweden was my winner last year and I was so happy Loreen won, but now honestly I’m kind of wishing they hadn’t won because in another country they likely wouldn’t be trying to alter the formula like this. Which isn’t how it should be.
This system does help prevent the 'sacrificial lamb' situation we've had over the past few years for the opener. They've all been songs that had reasonable potential (not necessarily winners, but solid Top 10ers) and were all thwarted by being the opener. Little weird they've brought it in in a year where they've have the opener sorted already! At first, it seems like it might be worse but for the sake of the show, it might be better.
The only thing this change will do is to increase to doubts about the contest. Some countrys already had a reputation of being jury favorites, now it will be much worse.
Dumb change, maybe im wrong but doubt it
My honest opinion I think they should put every countries flag on an orange hidden and release a monkey to find them.
Whatever order he picks is the shows order.
I’d tune in to that and far fairer unless the monkey is a highly trained Swedish one 🤔
So the producers choice include the producers of all countries that qualified for the final or only a few selected ones?
my understanding is that it's the producers from the host broadcaster but then also there are some producers who are consistent for every year of the show, the main one being Martin
@@esc1074It's television and therefore always manipulated.
I see your point and in the world where the focus was a good show it would make sense.
But the focus is also have big western countries favourably treated and allow small eastern countries equal treatment only if their song is a huge favourite.
It’s the same logic as oppressed groups having to work 140% harder to get the same treatment as those in the favoured class (insert gender, colour of skin, wealth, minority group, immigrants, sexual orientation or whatever else in the first category). You’ll be fairly treated only if you are exceptional isn’t in the spirit of United by Music.
If the focus is devide by tempo, staging etc., diversity - I’d be more in favour of the draw. I just don’t trust producers not to abuse extra power to give more favour to the rich and further screw the poor.
yep i totally agree but thats capitalism. if we want it to be fairer, we would need the contest to be publicly funded from a central source. even then, some countries would be contributing more. so an alternative is that all countries pay the same, but then small countries would complain they were paying so much
@@ESCTom you’re right. I wonder if national broadcasters being the main sponsors is something that will need to change with time as it is not sustainable.
Examples of France and Germany where public broadcasters have dropping viewing figures is not a good sign.
Maybe have all country broadcasters bid for rights? Public funding? Fan funding? National funding? EU funding? Mixed funding?
I want Eurovision to outlive me but I also want it to grow as a force of unity.
If the producers wanted this much control, why didn't they just go all the way and have 100% producer decided running order? With this new system, they can still stiff songs that draw 1st half and blame the draw without having to take responsibility, whilst also having more power to put the favourites somewhere, well, favourable. Feels like a fudge that's a positive for the producers but of little to no benefit for the participants. (Also, even if Switzerland or Croatia draw 1st half, you can bet your house on them not being placed in spots 2-7...)
I wonder if you try and make less cuts in your videos like Eurovision Histories does if they would be easier to edit - Just don't want you to get burnt out!
I think they should first classify the songs in genders: pop, dance, ballads, rocks or others. Then, putting them one of each style after the other, to contrast between them, and if there were only 2 or 3 songs of folk or different genres, place them every 7 or 8 spots. I think that would be a great way of doing it in Eurovision.
yea they could also do it by BPM
I dont know if anyone knows the answer but if a Country draws the first half do they have to go between 1 and 13 or can they go 14th, 15th or maybe 16th if most of your Producers Choice is thrown in the 1st half
First half will be 1 - 13 of course. 6 of the producer's choice will be in it as well (as Sweden takes up a spot already), while 7 will be in the second half, meaning 14 - 26.
my assumption would be that it has to be 1-13
Ugh. Ten first half, ten second half and six producer's choice I could've gotten behind but THIRTEEN???
Hi, you said that Eurovision is an entertainment show, to be honest it's not. It's not called Eurovision Entertainment Contest, it's the Eurovision Song Contest. It's about singing. That was my first thing.
Now the other thing is some news. I don't know if you heard it. I saw an interview with Petra Mede where she was asked if ABBA will appear in the final. She said that she can't give any specifics about it but you could say that ABBA will show up in one way or another either live onstage, on a screen or via link. She didn't say specifically those three, that is just my thoughts on it. My idea was for A-Teens formerly known as ABBA-Teens before ABBA was going to sue them for using their name. A-Teens would sing an ABBA medley that includes Waterloo and end the medley with Thank You For The Music while ABBA are being hoisted down to the stage. Just to get their standing ovations that they deserve.
But I don't think that is the way they will do it.
It is pretty obvious to me they will have the holograms on stage
Il be straight up - I’m just so sick of Sweden calling the shots at Eurovision- last massive change when jury /public votes were separated was decided by Sweden, now this producers choice . It may make good tv because ESC is a tv show after all as Tom has said but it doesn’t sit right with me . I’m on the fence on if producers will be fair or not
I don't like the change of voting in 2016. I'm fine with the system itself, but am salty about the way the points are presented. Who cares which jury gives how many points to whom if they are supposed to be neutral and independent from their country? What makes the points presenting interesting are questions about which country votes in which way. I want to find out the detailed public votes during the exciting show, not afterwards in a spreadsheet 😒 (I know all pros and cons about changing the way points are presented)
.....and giving the favourites better slots is disadvantaging the rest. Just because they are high in the odds doesn't mean they should be given a greater chance to win.....seems a little unfair.
2022: Depressing songs? That murky, greyish-looking water feature at the front of the stage hardly did anything to cheer us up.
They're so close to a good idea here, SO close... choosing the running order allocation is a great change, love that for the producers, but think about this for a second: Gimlo's choice! Eh? What do you think? Genius, right? Would make the whole thing a LOT better if you ask Gimlo
I feel like we still gonna get Croatia & the Netherlands in the 1st half somehow 😂
all I ask is why? xD Better way would be imho. Make this program long enough . Time to think and have fun. Feeling that u want to watch.
Hay Tom did you see Bambi Tug sing on the late late show ? Soooo good !
This new change is "great" immediately when we see the RO of the final we will be able to see who the EBU is "shafting" and who they are helping. 😂
Looking at the reactions at eurovisionworld, most people don't seem to be happy with this change. I also think the solution is rather meh. Somehow I have the impression that always only the symptoms of the running order are being combated instead of thinking about what could be done so that every participant has the same chance.
A few years ago I already thought it would make more sense to expand the song contest to several evenings. Even for the ASC (which was adapted from the ESC and also produced by Swedish producers) they managed it well, so that despite 56 participants there were never more than 11 per evening. In my opinion, at the ESC there are already too many in the semi-finals.
If there would be more several preliminary rounds, it would also be possible to make a more accepted and fairer situation with the automatic qualifiers (e.g. they could host the qualifying rounds, qualify automatically there for the semi-finals, but then still have to qualify for the grand final in the semi-finals).
Est - ce que quelqu'un peut m'expliquer en français les règles de l'Eurovision 2024 et que veux dire tout ces classements que l'on voit ?
Un monent le pays est premier , puis un autre moment il est 7 ème et ensuite 3 ème etc .....
Alors si quelqu'un parle bien français merci de m'expliquer les règles. Tout les commentaires , les réactions, les interview sont en anglais .
I hate that there are so many producers’ choice balls. What’s the point of only giving 6 acts first and 6 acts second half? It makes the first half pick seem like even more of a ‘punishment’. I would’ve split it 9-9-7 (with the 7 being producers’ choice).
The simplest solution is to use the semifinals classification to decide the order. Top 5's go in second half, Bottom 5's go in first half. Since the semifinals are televote-only, this makes the final be viewer-centric in its order. Meanwhile, juries can help out those in the first half, since juries tend to be less affected by running order. There, problem solved.
If they did it that way, people would know who had won or done well in the semis so it would spoil the results a little
@@ESCTom They would just need to say who is top 5 and bottom 5, the order would get scrambled within the halves by producer's choice. It would be similar to how San Remo works, but less specific since there would be 10 top 5 acts plus the 6 automatic qualifiers. It also would give more power to televoters in the semi's as they would be deciding the half in addition to qualification. I can also see one or two of the bottom 5's doing well in the final as they can stand out in the first half if they are by far better than others around them and just got unlucky in the semi's.
I haven't read the comments below so I apologize if this has been said already but 2022 really suffered from juries in the semis. No televote semi would allow dross like Systur or Marius Bear to make the final.
I really don't like this. It feels ambivalent to me. Either stick to the old system with 1st or 2nd half balls being drawn, or give the producers the complete freedom to arrange the running order as they want it to be.
I can also see a system in where the running order slot of the past 5 or 10 years is going to be decisive whether you are in the 1st or 2nd half the next year. If so, they have to sign you a their data-analyst 😉
There's also the added bonus that now we get to bitch and whine and blame the producers when our favourites don't do as well as we had hoped 😉😆
Giving producers more control is just going to mean that smaller countries and less hyped countries are going to get more consistently screwed.
As we've already seen with the semifinals, the producers have absolutely zero interest in anything other than ratings. Giving a country a better spot just because they've previously had bad spots is not something they will ever do.
This could also be a pragmatic decision for a totally different reason: staging! If multiple countries have brought really ambitious staging packages, then the producers will need more control to place those "big staging" songs around ad breaks, host filler bits etc. Thinking along the lines of Loreen's panini press last year or Spain's moon in 2021 that needed extra time to be set up on stage
yep, this is a great point too
Could the argument also be made that countries shouldn't come with staging that absolutely requires additional time? Seems unfair to me that if you come with big staging you basically can't be put on until later in the show?
They should just let AI decide the running order, based of song tempo, genre, gender, running order history, odds etc.
thats an interesting idea. Something that they could do in the future
When it was first announced I was, I was a little skeptical, but willing to be open-minded, and after a couple of days I agreed that it was probably the right move. Basically for the same reasons as you mention about similar songs being separated etc etc. The only thing I still don't like is that this seems a bit of a messy compromise between giving producers more control and having some randomness. I wouldn't be surprised if soon it goes 100% producer choice, and tbh, I wouldn't be against it.
i actually think its easier if you still have half random. you have a base thing to work off of, plus it helps counter accusations of rigging/fixing, even if its just a bit
I don't like this. This is just another way for the producers to tilt the outcome toward their preferred acts. There are ways to ensure a nice flow while doing so in a random way that doesn't let the producers play favorites.
I still think, It doesnt matter where you are in the running order.
Had Ukraine 2022 performed 2nd they would still have won.
Because as in other years, it was the winner for the wrong reasons. Last winning positions from 2008: 24, 20, 22, 19, 17, 18, 11, 10, 21, 11, 22, 12, 24, 12, 9. So, in 15 years with two semifinals, the first half has won 6 times, and second half 9 times, but in the last 9 editions the first half has had all its victories. Also, in 2023 we saw a one-digit position winning for the first time in 19 years. To date, only positions 2, 16, 25 and 26 haven't won.
Not fair at all !!!
I hope the "death slot" will go to a country that will draw first half. Imagine drawing "producer's choice" and being hopeful of a good slot only to be put 2nd... I think it would rub the country in question the wrong way. At least by drawing first half the country would be prepared of performing in the first half, while the producer's choices don't know which half they're gonna be in.
8:15 Actually, since 2016, Serbia has ALWAYS been in the first half of the semi final. Talk about bad luck.
ALBANIA ❤❤❤❤❤❤❤
This stinks. It’s still a competition, and this gives producers more scope to influence that competition. Just as we know they aready do on reality TV shows. Why was this not announced at the same time as the vote from the start change? It seems clear to me that the two go hand in hand. If Bjorkman gives a song a favourable juxtaposition, now it will instantly get loads of televotes. At the very least he should produce a statement explaining why he has drawn songs in certain positions.
Yes I also think this revamped system can make It more fair and more entertaning for the casual viewer.
My big beef of the day is that you lumped Monika Liu as one of the ‘sad heavy downbeat’ songs. She had one of the lightest, most uplifting songs of 2022.
Just watched Bambie Thug's acoustic performance on The Late Late Show - woweeeee! 💖💖💖
But in 2022 they could have broken up the 'gloomy' songs by sticking Moldova in the middle of them, but they chose not to do so. Therefore, I am very sceptical of the producer's choice initiative, it just leaves it open to give them more power to potentially favour certain broadcasters. Unless, they put in a caveat where any one country can not be put in the same half more than 3 years running or can not be placed in positions 2 and 3 more than once in a five year period. Yes, it makes it more complicated, but would add more credence to me.
I'm not overly enamoured with the voting lines opening straight away, either. I know it was announced pre-draw, but this does favour songs that are teeny-bopper friendly in the first half, (Sweden is very teeny-bopper friendly, move along nothing to see here), allowing young kids to vote in the first hour and then probably be in bed by the mid-way point. What they could bring back, is reversing the song order in the reprises like they tried in the early 2000s. I think it was in this period that Türkiye won from slot 4, so that would help negate the death-slots situation.
Totally agree with reducing the order in the recaps.
3:51 They put Moldova 7th out of 13 these songs, isn't that as much putting it in the middle it gets..?
90% of the viewers don’t care how the running order will be decided, they are mostly concerned with being able to stay awake long enough to see their own country perform.
Also, why are the first half considered bad? During the first 10 songs you are still focused but on the second half you are making toilet breaks, fetching things in the kitchen every other song (especially on the slow ones so you don’t accidentally fall asleep) and starts to think it will never end while it drags on and on forever until it’s finally time for the jury’s vote.
I hope you're right, because if I was one of the producers I think I will use these "choices" to give at least decent slots in the running order to countries who get unlucky in the recent years (such as Serbia and Albania) or countries who don't qualify very often (Georgia, Ireland, Latvia or San Marino for example).
But I'm afraid producers won't think like that and do everything for viewership and money.
I personally don't mind producer's choice. Given the volume of voters, I think the most popular song has the best chance of winning anyway. I also think that it's better that performances are arranged in such a way that the show does flow better. I get that people are upset about the lack of randomness and fairness, but I don't think it's so bad.
Why have 6 first half and 6 second half then? Just put them all as producers choice then. It'll be horrible if a country who doesn't want a first half position gets producer choice and still gets the dreaded second position so why not just give them all producer choice because before there's that sense and feel of hoping not getting the first half or hoping to get the second half. Now it's hoping to get second half or producer choice but also hoping the producers don't put me in the first half. Two stresses now for the artists and yes some stress over it like how we fans stress over it.
Either keep the first half second half or give all producer choice. Doesn't make sense at all.
@@AnonTripleagree, having 12 countries first and half and others as producers choice makes no sense, either leave it as it was or let them all be producers choice
@AnonTriple Oh yeah, I definitely agree that it should be producer's choice 100%.
@@Ninterd2i can guess what countries you're not from...
@@ddraven3180 Lol, I mean I understand why people are annoyed by it. I just don't think it ruins the contest.
Who does everyone want to win Eurovision 2024.
Croatia or Switzerland
well germany doesnt 🇧🇪🇧🇪🇧🇪🇧🇪
Croatia
netherlands
Croatia
My favourites,,, SWITZERLAND,,,,CROATIA,,,,,, BELGIUM,,,, GEORGIA ,,,,, LITHUANIA,,,,, ISRAEL.
Theres evolution and then there's just constant meddling for the sake of it. This is the latter.
I just want them to put all countries in the first and second semi with all having to qualify for the grand final instead of having these "Big Five" that always make it in, no matter if their song is good or not.
Then just have a pot from which one random person just picks enough for the first semi and everyone else ends up in the second semi. End of story!
Through this no judges will have their fingers in the order or the draw and all the talents will have a equal chance based on luck.
It would be the fairest way to go in my opinion and nobody could moan then that whoever choose whatever.
Sweden always makes it in whether the song is good or not.
That will never happen, losing a big 5 country in the semi final will lead to reduced ratings as the highest Eurovision ratings are in these countries and if the big 5 are made to perform in the semi finals their broadcasters will want to pay less money, meaning other countries would have to pay more. Which would lead to the withdrawal of many smaller countries who are struggling with finances as it is
Garbage change. Producers should have less and not more power deciding where anyone participates. And it is definitely not fair.
So who wants to make a bet that Switzerland, Croatia, Italy, Netherlands, Ukraine and France ALL draw FIRST HALF?
For me, there is no running order system that will ever be 100% fair or without "questions". I think this is worth to at least try out, and see how it works in the end. Like you, I trust the Swedish producers that they're being as fair as they can to everyone involved. I'm sure they'll reflect afterwards on if this new draw is one that they'll continue or if this did't work out how they intended to make the most dynamic show.
yea at the end of the day, Sweden already have their slot, and almost all the producers are Swedish, so its a good time to try it out 🤷🏻♂️
Let's make it clear, the 2016 change was the worse change that could have happened. Australia was the best song that year, however because the Europeans don't like Australia, it took the win away. European trolls come at me!
I like how Sweden isn't afraid to change the rules when they think an aspect isn't working. It really shows which countries understand the contest and which are just hosting because they got lucky the year before
yup, i totally agree. they arent just phoning it in, they are trying to progress the contest. that 2016 change of splitting the vote was absolutely amazing
I totally disagree - it's not about "not being afraid to change", but wanting to bend the contest to their own wishes & likes, which is just plain wrong, IMO.
Ever heard of don't fix if it ain't broken? MF has been crap the last 10 years so what exactly makes them qualified to do those changes to the ESC? They just want Sweden to win every year and don't give a rat's ass about anything else
I completely disagree. This system is much more complicated than needed and completely non transparent. Similar rules with those that make Melodifestivalen (Swedish Eurovision qualification) unfair and raise suspicions that it can be fixed.
If this "producer choice" made iolanda presenting Grito at 14th of the 2nd half...im glad they updated this choice! Its best spot ever! TELEVOTE for Portugal at 1st Semifinal please! 🇵🇹😎🇵🇹
I have more of a producers eye when it comes to this sort of thing so I have no problem with this change. Of course there’s going to be a lot of fans moaning about it bc they don’t like change in general.
Or because some people like fairness, or because some people can see this is just a change to further benefit the same countries every year or because some people don't worship Sweden's boots with their toungues like you do
@@ddraven3180 like Tom said, life isn’t fair in general
@@KylieWilson so we should make it more unfair? Just say you only want the same countries to succeed every year and shut your trap about "producers eye", better than pretending that much like the EBU ypu aren't blatantly xenophobic and purposefully wanna see some countries get screwed
@@ddraven3180 Exactly!!
Typical Sweden, a system much more complicated than needed and completely non transparent. Similar rules with those that make Melodifestivalen unfair and raise suspicions that it can be fixed. It is good to try to please the viewers but one needs to remember that Eurovision is a competition and it has to be a fair one. Most viewers would be disappointed if they thought that there is an attempt to fix the results of the competition.
Stupid idea.
Changes for big country and for money….they alverdy decide🥲
💰
Please Croatia delegation
Must leave completion in future