To think Eurovision is no longer about the talent

[misszebra]

Following from a discussion seen in lots of threads. I was so disappointed at the clear political motive behind the jury and popularity votes this year. Switzerland did fantastic, but IMO the image of Switzerland as the 'neutral' country might have been behind a lot of the jury votes at least, although I am glad he won over some others.
Germany were the best by miles I felt, Isaak has such fantastic raw talent and didn't need the circus around him to prove it.

Does anyone else think a lot of the votes were due to politics?

Its a shame to see clear talent pushed under the rug...

Quite. I was walking down a busy main road yesterday, with the usual long line of traffic waiting for the lights to change, and one car had 'Hold Me Now' unashamedly belting out on their playlist/radio. It sounded as brilliant now as it did when it was released the best part of 40 years ago and I may have sung along.

Yes OP, I agree. It seems to have gone from camp family fun that we in Britain by and large laughed at because all the other nations seemed to take it so seriously and were still largely shite, and laughed along with Wogan and latterly, Norton's subtly funny commentary, to a become an extension of Pride, with many acts steering towards the fetish and vulgar side of things. Christ, I wouldn't let my kids watch it these days.

And this year it all took a dark turn with the hounding and bullying of Eden Golan.

If the gay community love it, then great, but they really need to dial back on the extreme stuff, its just gross. And lame.

Thanks, yes, very good point - I forgot about the last year's winner automatically getting through!

I suppose it would seem a bit awkward merrily allowing a country to pay the immense amount that it costs to host, whilst throwing their entry out at the semi-finals - a bit like banning you from attending your own party!

That said, considering the huge hosting cost, it's far from unknown in the past for a hosting country to deliberately enter a weak song, to make sure they avoid having to pay to host it two years running except Ireland never got that memo!

Indeed, some countries have pleaded poverty to get out of hosting it the following year - including France one year! - as well as some countries just being too small to be able to do so. The likes of Monaco (who won in 1971) and San Marino have entire populations that are only twice or thrice the size of the capacity of the modern Eurovision venues! This is why the UK has hosted it more than any other country - 9 times - although we've only won 4 times (including joint winners with 3 other countries in 1969).

Hosting normally costs the host country between £8m and £26m (less the £5m participation fees from the participating countries, which they receive) - but Azerbaijan spent the equivalent of over £77m in today's money to host in 2012.

Eurovision has always been a bit silly and the votes have always been more about neighbourly relations than music. It's not a serious talent competition, even though some hits did come out of it over the years.

On one hand, I think a lot of the recent outrage is likely motivated by homophobia. On the other hand, it's true that the vibe with some of the acts was not pleasant or fit for a mainstream audience. The thing is, when straight people say they are not homophobic, they probably imagine monogamous gay relationships that are exactly the same as their own lives but with gay people. However a lot of gay subculture, especially gay male subculture, is genuinely transgressive and shocking to outsiders, and it can't (and shouldn't be) turned into something "for family audiences". Which doesn't mean that it doesn't need or deserve to exist, but there is a right time and place for everything.

This is something some of the artists and fans seem to ignore, they are caught in their own bubble. I do think discussions about the reaction to Nemo (inoffensive kid in flamboyant pink outfit sings about not wanting to be a boy or a girl) need to be framed differently from the reaction to Olly Alexander (men in codpieces mime an orgy and possibly sexual assault in a disgusting bathroom setting).

I also don't have any time for the yearly British self-victimisation. If Brits care about the results, why do they send tone deaf competitors almost every year?There are people doing open mic at my local pub who can sing better than Olly Alexander or Mae Muller. The one time in recent years the UK had a good act with Sam Ryder they did well. Tip from me: if it's hard to figure out a hit, just find a handsome man who can sing a boring ballad with minimal staging, it worked for Slimane this year, Marco Mengoni last year etc.

I thought Ireland 1994 was a clear attempt at self-sabotage after two in a row but then they won again with that dirge! Maybe the votes were actually for Riverdance.

I wonder if the host broadcasters/countries/cities break even. I went to Copenhagen which felt like it must have been done on a shoestring compared to Baku the year before, but it still must have cost a bomb.

I don’t think it’s ever been about talent that I remember. It’s a bit of a joke really. England nil points 😂 I don’t even watch it anymore. We always submit shit anyway and always barely get a hand ful of points at all.

It's not a conspiracy. It's the financial foundation of the whole contest. France, Germany, the UK, Spain and Italy set it up and I believe pay for the most of it. So they get through to the final automatically, where all the tiny countries who share borders then give their friends votes and none of the Big 5 are ever allowed to win. Because it's our party😂

Talent? Ha!

But it was a suitable vehicle for attention-hungry Greta Thunberg to put in a photo-opp appearance.

Looks like she's started her own Rent-a-Protester agency.

I admit I don't really understand the financial side of it. I know it's expensive to host. But where does the money go from things like ticket sales, merchandise, phone votes etc etc?

Also, while it is expensive to host, it does bring money into the local economy. Which should offset it to a degree.

Me and DD went to Malmo last time they won. Can't say I was impressed with the place itself. It reminded me of a Swedish Milton Keynes 😂It also surprised me that they would host it somewhere that just isn't that nice (guess it was the cheapest) as wouldn't you want people to really like the place and want to either go there on holiday or tell their friends/family they should really visit. I wouldn't recommend Malmo as a holiday to anyone!

The "boring ballad" point is an interesting one. Looking at UK entries this millennium, there is a clear divide where the ballads and mid tempo songs have done consistently better than the upbeat ones. As long as they are sung well - Bonnie and Englebert are the exceptions as their performances were ropey. Uptempo pop songs can win/finish high, but you have to go big - but ours have all been bland. The Code, Maneskin, Toy, Heroes and Euphoria were all big songs, not something that's pleasant enough but lacking impact.

Whereas getting a lovely lady/gentleman with a strong voice like Jessica Garlick, Jade Ewen or even Blue (and of course Sam) to do a more emotional lower tempo songs will get the "I vote for good singers" vote.

Switzerland was absolutely dreadful, one of the worst ever Eurovision songs, hated it.

Ukraine was by far the best song this year, and one of the best Eurovision songs ever. I did like Germany though

England has never been awarded a single point ever since the contest began... nor indeed has ever actually entered the contest...

The UK didn't even compete in the first year - and Spain didn't for the first four years.

Shows how much I watch it 😂 I thought all nations of the uk entered individually. 😅

I would actually like to see a UK entry that maybe featured bagpipes, or someone singing in Welsh. I think it would do better than sending second rate pop songs.

Or someone singing in Welsh accompanied by bagpipes and fiddles, while four Morris dancers - stripped to the waist obviously - jingle and clack their big sticks suggestively in the background.

The song would be called 'First Thing in the Morning', with lyrics outlining the correct ingredients of a fried breakfast. It would end in a scrap, which may or may not be part of the choreography.

I'd vote for that 😂