Credits
News
© esctoday.com
Politics vs. language at Eurovision
Russia and Ukraine: The new UK and Ireland?
In the 1980s and 1990s (up until the language rule was changed to allow countries to compete in any language), Ireland won the Eurovision Song Contest 6 times and managed to finish in the top three places a further three times. The United Kingdom achieved two victories and eight top three finishes at the competition. The advantage that the two countries had was that they sang in a language understood by far more voters than any other.
Removing the language rule to allow countries to sing in any language ended the dominance of the English speaking countries with immediate effect. Neither country has achieved a top five finish since - bar exception of the UK in 2002 finishing 3rd. At the same time, only Serbia's victory in 2007 was achieved without English lyrics.
The new powerhouses of the Eurovision Song Contest appear to be Russia and Ukraine. With the increasing number of countries from the former Soviet Union competing in the competition, their position grows increasingly strong. Russia's victory follows a third place finish in 2007 and a runners-up spot for Dima Bilan in 2006. Ukraine have finished second two years in a row, with some fans renaming the country as UK-raine, mimicking the United Kingdom's regular second place finishing position.
Despite winning the Eurovision Song Contest with a clear lead over Ukraine, Greece and Armenia, Russia's seven top marks came from six former Soviet nations and one country with approximately 10% of the population being recent Russian immigrants.
The Eurovision Song Contest has been a story of 53 years of development and evolution. At times, a critical point is reached where a change is necessary. The language rule change, the introduction of the semi final to allow more countries to compete, and the introduction of two semi finals to balance the chances of countries to qualify for the final are all examples of this.
HAVE YOUR SAY
The time may now have come to ensure that the voting balance in the final is also changed to ensure that a 'natural advantage' for some countries does not detract from the ability of all to compete. How can the voting system be changed to ensure that the Eurovision Song Contest remains fair to all with an equal chance of winning? Have your say in the reactions section below.
Related polls
- Norway: Vote for your favourite song in the final of Melodi Grand Prix
- Azerbaijan: Vote for your favourite act in the final of Milli Seçim Turu
- Hungary: Vote for your favourite act in the final of A Dal
- Iceland: Vote for your favourite song in the final of Songvakeppni Sjonvarpsins
- Malta: Vote for your favourite act in the final of Malta Eurovision Song Contest 2012
- Hungary: Vote for your favourite act in the second semifinal of A Dal
- Norway: Vote for your favourite song in the third semifinal of Melodi Grand Prix
- Sweden: Vote for your favourite act in the first semifinal of Melodifestivalen
- Malta: Vote for your favourite act in the semifinal of Malta Eurovision Song Contest 2012
- Bulgaria: Vote for your favourite act in the Bulgarian national final 2012
- Latvia: Vote for your favourite act in the final of Eirodziesma 2012
- Belarus: Vote for your favourite act in the final of EuroFest 2012
Go directly to the reactions
Recent news about United Kingdom
UK: New Eurovision and europop party in London 11
Charity Show : Interview with Sue Lawrence 1
Special Charity Show on April 11th 9
UK: Scott Mills to present Eurovision semi-finals from Baku 32
Paddy O'Conell's One Man Show: My Semi Heaven 9
Reactions
When reacting to a news item, please stick to the topic. Inappropriate messages (swearing, racism, hate, etc.), messages in other languages than English and spam (which includes URL advertising) will be deleted and you risk your account being removed. Reacting on newsitems is only possible when logged in as a member. Still don't have member account?
Click here to react Click here to become a member (free!)
Why not a western eurovision using 50/50 jury/televote (with one vote per phone), orchestra and no dancers. Each country pays an equal amount to enter or contributes on a sliding scale depending on ability to pay. Cuts out big 4 paying for everything when they don't need to.
Then an eastern eurovision with whatever voting system they want., and paying for it however they choose. Top ten from each go into a super final (which nobody in the west has to watch 'cos we've already decided our favourite fairly as a community).
Superfinal can then be won every year by Russia (backed up by threats of invasion or cutting gas off). Doesn't really matter who wins the Super because nobody in the west will be watching it anyway.
And before anyone starts with their "Eurovision belongs to nobody", "you can't say them and us" etc etc.... This was a (hugely successful, much-loved) western song contest for 40 something years and was the highlight of the year for millions of us. This was OUR party and everyone’s welcome to join in, just don't kick the door down and start stealing and cheating and trying to throw the host family out.
Norway, you were robbed!
To Indrek
I mistakenly put Denmark twice. So Finnland would go to the Scandinavia Group, Denmark in th Benelux-Den group...
Why is it unfair? Serbia would this way benifit from the two Ex-Yu Blocks and maybe Germany and Swi-Aut Block because of Diaspora instead from some 10 countries if it were all separated...
This way there would be less Diaspora influence but it probably still wouldn't bring that much diversity to the voting.
I might calculate the results if they were done this way...
lina baby doll:
I think you misunderstood Xevus*. He was surprised that Azerbaijan had NOT given any votes to Armenia.
Xevus*:
I admit that I expected Azerbaijan to vote for Armenia 
Xevus":
Another Swedish member on here (Yeah Right!) said the same thing about Azerbaijan the other day.
Go back to jury voting is probably the simplest way
But another idea is not to reveal on the night which country is which, it would only be song 1, song 2 etc .. it probably wouldnt work, but it is worth a try
Or, they could work out a complicated mathematic system, where different points mean different things for each country. So, if the country (say Croatia) gives 12 points to Serbia, the points would be reduced by 3/4, so it would only be worth 3 points. But if Croatia voted for Holland, it would be worth 12 points. They could work out a system for each country relative to each other country. The would have to take into consideration, if they usually vote for each other at the ESC, if they are ethnically linked, if there are a lot of people from that country living in the voting country, if they have a trade history and if they border each other.
I just hope they do something about the voting, because it is getting ridiculous !!
One idea:
I take Estonia as a sample: 1 300 00 citizens; 67% estonians and 25% russians.
Estonia has 15 counties: russian live mainly in two of them.
So if we could count the votes inside of Estonia like this: each county gives 12, 10, 8 etc points...then the result would be totally different. I belive the Estonias vote would be more like this:
12. Finland
10. Latvia
8. Denmark or Sweden
7. Russia
...
My question: is Finland or Latvia better neighbour? (politically yes, but... )????
to Boris M...
As I thought u would make two groups of those exYugo states!!!
But in wich group would u place Finland?
In one word: your sugsestion is not the fairest.
Btw i am from Estonia. And i am not happy our country votes for Russia all the time (but we cant keep the 25% russians living in ESt away from telephones. 
My proposal for the final would be to form voting blocks.
Countries having more than 30 millions citizens would vote as before (GB, GER, SPA, FRA, POL, TUR, RUS, UKR and ITA if returns)
Other countries should be split into voting blocks up to 3 countries. Every block gives only one set of points 1-12 (based on sum of points of every single country in the block with some way of dealing with a tie - let's say back-up jury). This way Russia would benefit 12 points from Baltic states with margin of lets say 8 points to Greece as oposed to the margin of 24 points if every single country from Baltic Block voted...
Countries from the same block would be able to vote for each
other...
Baltic states (EST, LAT, LITH)
Caucasus states (AZE, ARM, GEO)
ex YU 1 (FYROM, SER, MNTNGR)
ex YU 2 (SLO, CRO, B&H)
East Mediterrenean (CYP, ISR, GRE)
Small Countries (MAL, San MAR, Albania and MON if returns)
Central European Countries (SWI, AUT ,HUN)
East Balkans (ROM, BUL, MOL)
Slavic Countries(CZE, SLOvakia, BLR)
Benelux (BEL, NET, DEN)
Scandinavia (NOR, SWE, DEN)
Atlantic (IRL, ICL,POR)
visite http://clubmusicportugal.blogspot.com /
eurovision blog
@ keith timmons
absolutley right.
The solution is simple:
Either 50/50 Jury/televote and/or restrict televoting to one vote per phone
There is no other way!
Keith - are you kidding me? You from Norway?
Have Norway ever in the last 8 years gave 12 point outside Nordic country? maybe once... - but I do not complaint.
I am fed up here -in Netherland, which ( as well as UK , Germany, Belgium, even France now) give 12 to Turkey, but thats is life. Dont give me this Golden Rule.
keith,
i agree with you totally.
I have watched the contest since 1976 when the eastern countries had'nt come over and flooded western europe, the contest was really enjoyable then.
Now with the influx of eastern europeans to the rest of europe it has all changed.
i was under the impresion the contest is a SONG contest not a preformance/gimmick contest
@Artem X:
I am speaking here on behalf of the founders and traditional nations of this game. I am not telling you to do anything. But I read a lot about your attitudes in the way you vote.
In the Eurovision Song Contest, some of us have been playing for decades. Most of us have been going at least since the mid-70s, and that even includes Israel, Greece and Turkey. In the 80s we were lucky to have Cyprus and Iceland join us. In 1994 we were joined by a whole group of Eurovision virgins. At this time the experienced nations had been playing for over 30 years already. We had grown up with the contest, we had helped shape it, and we deeply respected its rules. And the Golden Rule was:
You cannot vote for your own country.
After 1994, and in particular from 2000 onwards, we have welcomed new friends into our treasured game. But alas, they have no respect for the way this game is played. They continually break the Golden Rule by voting for their country because they have found a loophole: They are physically located in a country which is not their own. This enables them to vote for their country, but it does not free them from their moral obligation to respect the Golden Rule.
I'm not saying YOU or anyone MUST follow it. But I don't think highly of people who disregard the Golden Rule due to lack of tradition and lack of respect. But the scoreboard doesn't lie: It tells us precisely who those people are. And if they imagine they will get our respect by cheating their way to a victory, they must think again.
Hi Keith.
Who is we? NL, Sweden? Denmark? UK? ....
Dont give me this nonsense! I voted for Ukraine and Georgia... Why - because I liket it. In the end Russia is won. And who are YOU (not you Keith) to tell me how we (me) should vote.
@Artem X:
Why don't we vote for our own country? Because we play fair. We don't break the Golden Rule of Eurovision ("you are not allowed to vote for your own country" . It's not East vs West; it's a matter of respect vs disrespect for the Golden Rule.
Everybody talking about imigrants from E Europe voting for their country... What about 3 million Brits living and on holiday in Spain, France, Portugal? When I been in Portugal - did not see many Ukrainians... - But Brits - up to your neck... Why do they do not vote for their beloved country? Because they dont care, and it was s**t anyway, as well as French and German entry. Everybody - Grow up. On the end of the day, the best is won. OK - if Russia did not win, then all will be saying Ukraine did not deserve to win. If Greece win - all will be saying it was crap.
The best idea - why not to count all votes individually. For example:
UK give
120774 votes to Turkey
11999 - to Ireland
1288 - to Poland and so on.
And the winner is - the country which got most individual votes.
Of course everybody could vote only once then. But it is more fair, and countries with more viewers could have more power.
Why should votes from San Marino (for example) have the same power as German votes... And Balkan (Nordic, Baltic, Soviet) votes to each other will be less substantial.
P.S. Everybody saying Big 4 give a lot of money , so they are in Final. I been on EBU website - but no info on $ contributions. How much more they pay and why? I cannot imagine countries like Russia, Netherlands, Switzerland, Poland, Ukraine, ... cannot afford to give more money. Big 4 should be scrapped!
Anyway lets stop all these silly moans (like why didn't you vote for Portugal?) - because.
I guess it should be like this:
1st vote to one country: € 1
2nd vote to one country: € 2
3rd vote to one country: € 4
4th vote to one country: € 8
5nd vote to one country: € 16
...
and so on !
So, inmigrants wanted to vote in their own country, they should spend, for the first 5 votes, € 31, for the first 6 votes, € 63, and so on . . .
I guess this would retract them, as well as neighbouring voting from mvoting many times.
Besides, with this exponentially growth in cost of phone calls, EBU wouldn't loose any money and diaspora and neighbouring votes would dramatically drop and that would be more fair!
i have sent an email to svant stockselius telling him my solution which is the following:
The countries that participate in the ESC will be divided into groups which will take part in a contest (one for each group, preferably the same day and different countries of course) and only a certain number of them will be able to go to the contest (which will be only one final again so that it doesn't get so boring like this year). Furthermore, the numbers of countries qualifying to the final from one group can vary according to a jury that will decide if one group is better than another. In addition to that, if the group consists of 5 countries the voting system used will be that each country can give 8, 10 and 12 points and if the group consists of 10 countries 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12 points will be given by each country. Moreover, a jury, which will comprise of musicians from all European countries, will vote just like a country, giving the same points. The winner of the previous year will of course qualify to the Final without having to compete with any other country. These are the groups:
1st GROUP: The Big Four (all 4 will go to the Final so there won't be a contest for them):
-France
-Germany
-(Italy if decided to participate)
-Spain
-the UK
2nd GROUP: The Scandinavian countries (3 will go to the Final):
-Denmark
-Finland
-Iceland
-Norway
-Sweden
3rd GROUP: The countries of the Eastern Europe, coming from the USSR (5 of them will go to the Final):
-Armenia
-Azerbaijan
-Belarus
-Estonia
-Georgia
-Latvia
-Lithuania
-Moldova
-Russia
-Ukraine
4th GROUP: The countries that once belonged to Yugoslavia (3 countries to the Final):
-Bosnia and Herzegovina
-Croatia
-Serbia
-Montenegro
-Slovenia
-(Slovakia if decided to take part)
5th GROUP: The countries of the Mediterranean and the Balkan Countries (with Romania) (6 countries to the Final):
-Albania
-Bulgaria
-Cyprus
-FYROM
-Greece
-Israel
-Malta
-(Monaco if decided to take part)
-Romania
-Turkey
-San Marino
6th GROUP: The countries of the Western and Central Europe (5 countries to the Final):
-Andorra
-(Austria if decided to take part)
-Belgium
-Czech Republic
-Hungary
-Ireland
-(Luxembourg if decided to take part again)
-the Netherlands
-Poland
-Portugal
-Switzerland
A total of 26 countries(unless one of the big four wins the ESC, so 25 will participate) will take part in the Final of the ESC and from my point of view it's the best way to start facing block voting coming mostly from the countries of the USSR. In addition, in the Final only the countries participating will be able to give points to the other countries, which I think is quite obvious.
I agree with lina.....
People in the west do not care about eurovision......
serves them right .....
bring north africa into the contest..... and the middle east.....
maybe votes would be equally shared....(of course 12-10 and 8's would go for their neighbours......) but we still have the rest of the points that might make a difference!
just a thought if you were the EBU and thought that the big four may pull out of eurovision , who would you look to ,to step in with funding ? yes correct russia and you may perhaps make sure they won in order to raise the profile of eurovision in that country . just a thought
what should brings europe when in the final can vote all 43 countries????
NOTHING!
we have seen it!
at first:
I would like to see the full program with the points from
1-12 by the spokersperson!
the voting part is the most greatest highlight in the show!
please bring it back!!!
please let just the participating countries in the final to vote!
please bring juries to the event, too!
this new rule could help against the diaspora!
we will see next year 2 semi finals again...
the voting should be change in the final!
-the countries from the semi 1 should vote in the final only for these countries from semi 1 + big four and host country AND not more!!!
-the countries from the semi 2 should vote in the final only for these countries from semi 2 + big four and host country AND not more!!!
-the big four should be divide in two... two of them to vote for the participating countrys from one semi final which has passed in the final! + votes for the other 2 big fours! + votes for the host country!
-only the host country should vote for all participating countries in the final.
-countries that has not passed in the final should't have to vote!
the idea with the voting like this idea would be perfect! every country would have a change to get points!
and this is the next new rule:
JURIES PART!
okay, jury system is not 100% against the diaspora
but it could helps 50%!
-after all given points from the participating countries
the juries could give their votes.
-only one jury from each country should give just once the highest "12" point for a country that came in TOP 10!
-the jury have to search only one country from top 10
and these country gets from the jury the 12 highest point!
this could be the new rule of the voting part from the jury!
and finally europe has a real winner!
Only an idiot can believe in this article. Every one who knows any single thing about ESC will know that last 5 year won ortodox, cyrillic countries: 2008 - Russia, 2007-Serbia, 2005-Greece, 2004- Ukraine. All those countries had very strong mafia.
We also know that political kitchen started in early 60's when scandinavian countires begin with point sharing.
This voting sysetm - televoting, and all participant country voting will destroy ESC. Coz they open the way to voting manipulation. And for the end Mr. Svante Stockelious is well corrupted person and i think we need anticriminal investigation in EBU.
One of the main reasons why the voting is so predictable now is the fact that they highlight the countries that have already received points from the announcing country. It's not hard to predict where the 12 points are going if there is only one country left on the Top 10 which is not highlighted. Compare it to Luxembourg 1984 (for instance); there's no such highlighting there and the voting was much more difficult to predict simply because you had to rely on your own memory.
Guys please wake up, see the Armenian diaspora. It is the biggest and Armenia got the 4th place with a shitty song which is worse than most of the songs behind them
read and follow the media reports and you will see - no one cares any more - viewing figures are dropping and the voting is a joke! listen - you dont have to try and justify Eurovison to me - I was a huge fan for for 25 years - but this year has been the turning point and now I hate it. The voting is boring and predictable and the magic goine...... bye
The list of 298 reactions is divided into 12 pages. Choose a page:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12
React yourself
This news article is older than one week. Reacting to articles is only possible in the first week after publication.
