Eurovision 2016: EBU responds to results revision petition

by Jessica Weaver 37 views15

Following calls for the revision of the final results of the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest in which Ukraine gained their second contest victory with their entry 1944, the European Broadcasting Union (EBU) has today released a statement in response to the highly publicised online petition.

Two days have passed since the Grand Final of the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest took place at the Globe Arena in the city of Stockholm in which Ukraine’s Jamala and her song 1944 was crowned the winner of the competition, gaining much attention internationally and receiving a generally mixed response from the viewing public over the days to follow.

This year saw a change to the voting procedure of the competition, the main focus of that being on the voting presentation itself in order to build the tension and excitement of the results with the actual winner being revealed at the very end of the results revelation, similar to the style of that from the annual Swedish national selection, Melodifestivalen.

The results were revealed in 2 parts; the first half saw the results presentation of the national juries from each of the 42 competing nations which were revealed by each country’s spokespersons and the second half saw the revelation of the public televote.

Despite Australia winning the jury vote and Russia winning the public televote, the combination of the final votes concluded that Ukraine would go on to win the contest, receiving the highest amount of points to date with 534.

Following Saturday’s final results, an online petition calling for the revision of the results was set up, gaining mass interest and receiving over 320,000 signatures as of the time this was written. Due to this, the EBU has released a statement in response to the online petition.

The 2016 Eurovision Song Contest was a spectacular show and a testament to a year of hard work by so many people from so many countries. The live shows were world-class television productions with a thriller climax on Saturday night.

We understand the passions and emotions that are engendered through the Eurovision Song Contest. In light of this, we have taken notice of your petition and appreciate this opportunity to respond.

The winner of the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest was decided by music industry professionals and you, viewers at home, each with a 50 percent stake in the result. Ukraine’s Jamala won, thanks to broad support from both the juries as well as televoters. She did so with an outstanding performance of an emotional song, telling a personal story.

Australia’s Dami Im won the jury vote and Russia’s Sergey Lazarev won the televoting. They both deserve credit for their world-class performances, their great songs and for taking their loss as true professionals. They may not have won the contest, but responded to the outcome as winners. We respect and appreciate them for that.

The Eurovision Song Contest is a competition. There can only be one winner. We understand that not everyone agrees with the outcome of this year’s Eurovision Song Contest however in a competition where the results are decided based on a subjective and often very personal opinions, there will always be people who do not agree. Regardless of this, the result remains valid by all means, in accordance with the rules as they were known to each participating broadcaster, each artist and each dedicated fan.

Ukraine is, and will remain, the winner of the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest. Whether you agree or disagree, we call upon those who signed this petition to embrace the result, valid in accordance with the rules, and to continue a constructive dialogue about how to further strengthen and improve the Eurovision Song Contest.

Preparations for the 2017 Eurovision Song Contest are already underway with 5 cities in Ukraine having expressed their interest in hosting next year’s competition; Kiev, Lviv, Odessa, Kherson and Dnipropetrovsk. The 2017 Eurovision Song Contest is currently planned to take place on the 16, 18 and 20 May 2017.

ESCToday is growing and always looks for new members to join our team! Feel free to drop us a line if you're interested! Use the Contact Us page or send us an email at vacancies@esctoday.com!
  • MarioVision

    I’m surprised that UKRAINE is the winner of this year’s EuroVision
    but I still believe that it was a fair deserved winner (as I already stated)
    Ukraine was NOT my favorite to win & I don’t think either that is an truly outstanding WOW winner
    but on the other way I justify Jamala’s victory.
    I might didn’t get the same chilling vibes as I did when Denmark or Austria won 3 & 2 years ago
    but I still embrace Jamala’s victory.

  • MarioVision

    UKRAINE’s song although might sound too old fashioned & sad/melancholic to many people
    at least IS a beautiful special song on its own way <3
    Jamala delivered a fantastic live performance
    & she managed to transmit perfectly the main feeling of her dramatic song to our ears & minds. <3

    On the other way, RUSSIA's song was just crappy although Sergey's performance & staging were TOP.
    Australia's song was also dull boring without any real highlights,
    although Dami's live performance was also fantastic.

  • MarioVision

    It doesn’t matter that UKRAINE’s song ”1944” is not the typical song
    that would do great on music charts or that would get played on the night clubs or in the radio.
    Its still a great beautiful song to listen <3
    By the way, I read that it is doing (surprisingly) very good on the european charts! :)
    It is charting on over 40 countries! :)

  • MarioVision

    Mainly the songs of EUROVISION rarely or never do good on charts anyway!
    And I really don’t give a damn about the lame charts anyway!
    (They are fixed & have the crappy music
    that all the robotic sheeps of the mass are listening!)

  • Adam Sebastian

    Funny on the double standard of EBU for not even mention one of the main elements of the complaint — the political elements. It’ s not a personal story, it already raise tension between Russia and Ukraine, and the singer said so. In the future when Armenia raise flag, Serbia sends “1999” or other country sends political song, the EBU better shut their month, for the Pandora’ s Box is opened by “them”.

  • Bruno

    Nice lie i noticed.

    “The winner of the 2016 Eurovision Song Contest was decided by music
    industry professionals and you, viewers at home, each with a 50 percent
    stake in the result. Ukraine’s Jamala won, thanks to broad support from
    both the juries as well as televoters. She did so with an outstanding
    performance of an emotional song, telling a personal story.”

    The majority of the televoters give more points to Russia not Ukraine. Ukraine was chosen long before the votes were voted in.

    “Ukraine is, and will remain, the winner of the 2016 Eurovision Song
    Contest. Whether you agree or disagree, we call upon those who signed
    this petition to embrace the result”

    The 200,000 who signed the petition seem to disagree and wont be embracing a Muslim win.

  • Bruno

    Exactly although i do expect some countries wont be coming.

  • Veronica Pescud

    in my view there were better beautiful songs than Jamala’s. But this does not matter. What matters, is that jury’s choice is Autstralia, Televoters’ chosice is Russia, and,suddenly, Eurovisions choice is Jamala. How could that be? In addition, how could it be, that 8 countires’ jury gave Russia 0 points whilst the people of those countries (including Ukraine) gave 10-12? such discrepancy reeks of political fixing of the juries.

  • MarioVision

    Ukraine’s song was NOT either my #1 favorite song to win.
    But this doesn’t mean that Ukraine was still not fair enough OK winner.
    We didn’t have only televoting but juries as well 50%-50%
    So since Russia did not do that great in the juries compared with its super run in televoting I can see why this costed the victory to Sergey.
    It was the same with last year that ITALY did not do that great in the juries
    but the difference this year was that the full results of the juries were announced analytically instead.
    I’m sorry that your favorite Russia lost but I didn’t like at all Sergey’s song.
    And I feel relieved that Russia didn’t win.

  • poussemoussu

    The worst entry in Eurovision history!!! 2016 was an exceptional vintage and I still cannot believe that Ukraine won with a song that not only is not melodious but doesn’t show sensibility to the original concept of Eurovision: unity. Talking about the past shouldn’t be the topic of a song. That goes for France last year.
    I don’t know how Ukraine managed to win but I find it very fishy and don’t trust the voting system really. It feels like somebody in the background is pulling the strings….

  • poussemoussu

    Completely right!!!! She won’t hit the chart with that crap!

  • Saturno Saturno

    Just check the jury score-board and then you can find that namely those countries politicaly allied to todays government of “ukraine” (e.g. Poland, Latvia or Letonia, Estonia, Czech Rep., Netherlands, UK, Australia, Georgia…) gave zero points to the Russian entry and even put it in the bottom of their list. In total 21 county-jury did not vote at all for Lazaev´s even when, in many cases, the audiences of those countries gave a high score to his performance (in total 169 points). The differences is only explained by means of tricky agreements.

  • antfrarob

    A muslim win? Are you freaking serious? Are you aware of how retarded that comment is?
    Ukraine came 2nd in the televote, and 2nd in the jury vote. The Russian song didn’t score well with the juries because it was mediocre. The public voted for it because of the show, not the song. Russia came 3rd. Deal with it.

  • antfrarob

    If the political element was an issue then it should have be raised before the contest. The EBU did review the song at it was allowed. End of discussion.

  • James Townsend

    But the song goes against Eurovision’s own rules quite blatantly? Hypocrisy and the response of the EBU to the petition is downright offensive.