Nord User Forum

It's not so big in the US, but is HUGE in Europe. I saw the Swedish entry Loreen. I didn't think it was so great a song. Don't get me wrong, there are some great musicians in Sweden, as in the rest of Europe. It seems campy to me, but maybe I just don't get it. What is your opinion? Do European musicians take this seriously?

No ….it was serious some decades ago when it was called Grand Prix Eurovision de la Chanson, and at that time the song itself was all that counted and the price went to the song and text writers. Now it’s just ridiculous, musical quality does not count anymore but the most crazy outfit or show

This is an interesting question. It must have been in my childhood that I last saw part of a show.

In my country, the public discussion usually is if at least the public or even the audience takes the contest seriously. I don't know that type of musicians that would care. As there are about 180 mio spectators every year - from Europe, western Asia and northern Africa - it has to be taken seriously from the business side. A certain type of professional composers and producers seem to take it seriously as well.

Maybe you need to know that the juries' vote is only 50% - the rest is televoting by the audience. Social media may play a big role. Besides, it's all about national public broadcasting corporations launching their candidates (via jury or televoting or any other way) and juries at the same time, letting them pass through semifinals with nationally separated televotings and collecting votes from other nations in the finals - neither national jury nor audience is allowed to vote for the own country. Acts need to be new, original and semi-playback, aren't allowed to contain a political message in a controversial sense, but don't need to be in the country's language any more (from 1999). As public voting plays a big role and you need to collect points from a lot of countries, a winner act has probably passed a severe test in mass taste and intercultural suitability. I have my imagination what sort of quality statement this is.

After 1991, a lot of countries from eastern Europe (including Russia) joined the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) as the organiser of the contest. A few years later, a new rule offered the candidates of the Big Five (Germany, France, Britain, Spain and Italy) a wildcard. Sounds like a business driven decision, too.

After some years with full public voting, juries are back in the process since 2008. Their members are meant to have 'some relation' to music or the music business. But there have nevertheless been issues with corruption in the past - the last one I know of through the jury of Georgia.

The Big Five thing is indeed a business decision.

The problem was that if any of them didn’t make it into the final, viewership would tank, since they represent the biggest market. This created problems for the whole show that have been avoided since by automatically qualifying them.

I guess the biggest problem with the Eurovision is that everyone is trying to do two things at once: appeal to the huge international masses and somehow still stand out. The result is a weird yet uninteresting mess.

Me being from Finland (we came 2nd, voted 1st by the audience), I heard people talking a lot about how rigged the whole contest is. I'm 97% sure they just want it hosted in Sweden next year because of ABBA's anniversary. So the jury had to vote heavily for Loreen, since the winner is always the next host.

Yeah, Sweden on ABBA's 50th anniversary is just too good a fit.

Either way, it's entertainment industry: I make ZERO assumptions of fairness or neutrality, if there's a good spectacle to be had.

You can bet that even *I* will be watching next year if I have time, if only to catch an appearance by ABBA (or their holograms).

I love ABBA.

Well sure. So what that an internationally produced annual tv show is somehow not sincere, if it means that we get more ABBA.

Exactly. I mean, the "competition" aspect is largely unrelated to the actual music, anyway...