Credits
Written by
Published
Source(s)
News
© esctoday.com
"These isssues should not be linked"
Svante to Estonia: Eurovision is a non political event
Earlier this week, Estonian Minister of Culture Laine Jänes supported a proposal by chairman of ERR Margus Allikmaa stating that the country should boycott the Eurovision Song Contest due to the political situation between Russia and Georgia. Mr Stockselius feels that the Eurovision Song Contest is a non-political event and that politicians do not have the right to decide whether to boycott it or not. "These issues should not be linked. We are organizing a non-political event and if the hosting country is able to ensure the safety of participants, there is no reason why it should not be allowed to host the finals," said Svante.
Mr Stockselius also added that it is entirely up to the country to decide whether they wish to participate or not. It has happened many times in the past that countries take a break from the contest to return later.
Related polls
- 1st elimination show in the UK: Your favourite?
- 1st semi final in Iceland: Your favourite?
- Turkey decided: do you like Düm tek tek
- Albania decided: do you like Më mërr në ëndërr?
- Albanian selection concluded: did you like the Festivali i kenges 47?
- Estonia: best entry so far?
- Which kind of national selection finds the best song for Eurovision?
Go directly to the reactions
Recent news about Estonia
Estonia: Eesti Laul 2009 Songs Announced 23
Estonia: 110 songs submitted for Eesti laul 12
Estonia: New name, new format, new dynamics 23
Estonia: Heidy Purga takes over Eurolaul production 27
Estonia will participate in 2009 Eurovision! 54
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!)
probably Estonia is just desperate that it is the only country (along with Andorra), which never made it into the final.
Mr. Stockselius?.....which stuff are you taking?.....i want from it too :-)
The results are always manipulated. How can we be sure the points correspond to the number of phone calls? And has the majority of the Greek voted for Cyprus every single time in the last decade? Or the Danes for the Suedes? Just like the juries used to do countless times before...?
There will never be a perfect system, so I think we should drop the question for once and for all. I truly hate it, but I can't help it, so F it... Let the contest be as it is for as long as it is sustainable. Sooner or later it will implode anyway...
The jury will be able to judge the songs, not the show. And they will watch and listen to the entries more than once or twice. That's why I suggest a 50/50 system.
A jury can also be restricted to region-voting, which is impossible to do with televoting.
There are so many solutions, if the EBU would only look in to them.
The jury won't have the guts to use friendly vote so clearly as the faceless public, if you see what I mean...
That's why I want to know who the jury is. If noone knows those people, they are as faceless as the public. Also, judging from my experience as Greek, juries vote more politically than common people. If you look at the old Eurovisions and how Greece, Cyprus and Turkey voted, you'll see that Greece and Cyprus rarely (if ever) exchanged votes with Turkey whereas this is not the case with televoting.
Another thing is that if the 50/50 rule is introcuded, I don't see why there should be ppl from the public in the juries...the public is represented through televoting, so why should half of the jury be members of the public, too? I think the jury should consist of professional musicians only.
The jury will be able to judge the songs, not the show. And they will watch and listen to the entries more than once or twice. That's why I suggest a 50/50 system.
let us leave esc as it is.
voting of the audience is ok.
why do you think that the jury would do work in the better way?
lordi would never win - if there was jury's voting. but they were such an enrichment for esc (from standard esc songs)
with the jury, esc will be in the phase of the regression: seventies and eighties music will be back (with terrible ballads a la irlandaise)
Well... What can I say...?
That the ESC is not a political event, I'm not so sure. It's not the first time there are boycotts or political innuendos of some sort in this contest and I think that shouldn't be traditional, though totally acceptable, if relevant, of course. The conflict between Russia and Georgia is a delicate and controversial question, so it's normal to see such demonstrations. It happened before the Olympic Games because of Tibet, happened millions of times during and before previous Olympics and will always happen, whenever there's an event involving a big community of countries. We have to admit it's a great opportunity to bring any issue to a big audience.
Concerning the voting system, it will always be political whether a jury or a televote is used. Personally, I believe the jury is more trustworthy, because the televote provides a great desguise for the broadcasters... The jury won't have the guts to use friendly vote so clearly as the faceless public, if you see what I mean...
But, as I usually say (or think), to me all is fine if you vote for Portugal... 
@Muireanne:
Oh no, you misunderstand me. I completely agree a 50-50 division is the only way forward. We can't keep the 100% televoting, year after year it proves itself to be a miserable failure.
Professional juries are an idea but without voting viewing rates will drop enormously, probably near bankrupting the contest so that's no idea either.
50-50's the only way.
But I don't see the huge merit in professional artists. I don't know how it works elsewhere but the people on Dutch juries are supposed to be music experts otherwise it's just a mini televote. I would say musicians are less qualified if anything. How could you expect a serious, say, Irish or Belgian folk musician to judge Teräsbetoni, a rockstar to judge brainless dancing the shake-your-qele-shake-it-some-more, or a good-for-nothing narcissistic git like Dima Bilan to judge... well basically anything where musical talent is required...
ahem. no prejudice there by the way.
the real zingo star
I agree!!
It would be like Moscow 1980!!!!!!
Boycott murdering Moscow.
Not really no. But it's an option, 'cause like you say: the general public holds its vote in the televote. Ok.
The fact that the average public DOES vote through televoting. So if there is 50-50, wouldn't it be fairer if the half of the decision would be up to musicians?
Ok, how about the jury consisted ONLY of professional musicians?
But why? What qualifies them more than the average public?
Thanks for that article, Stockholm..very useful.
Ok, how about the jury consisted ONLY of professional musicians?
Calabacines,
I still think that the jury should be public. Anything less for me is shady. Just my opinion.
I don't think people would really care who it is that gets to be
a) one of several persons having
b) 1/18th of a say in who gets to be
c) one of ten qualifiers...
No, I don't think so either. But a jury is needed for sure (given the most recent results of the ESC), I'm sure (almost) everyone will agree on that.
20 jury-members per country = 860 individuals deciding 50% of the final result. 860 people... that's not that bad I guess.
Back in the 70's the entire ESC-jury existed out of max. 100.
Public jury election-events?
I don't think people would really care who it is that gets to be
a) one of several persons having
b) 1/18th of a say in who gets to be
c) one of ten qualifiers...
There was an article on oiko some time ago written by a guy who was a jury member in the UK. I can't post the link but you can go to
o i k o t i m e s.com/v2/index.php?file=articles&id=3427
"During our selection process for Eurovision, we always get to see the jury and we know who they are, during the Olympics we also always see the judges, why should this case be any different?"
First, there´s jury in your country, but not in mine. It´s up to the public to pick the song.
Second: In the Olympics you see the jury, who are athletes as well or former ones. In ESC backup jury some members are not musicians or have any background in music. The comparision is like apples to oranges. In sports competitions, like track and field, if you are fast enough, you win it. Or in judo, according to the rules, you can defeat the opponent with ypon. In music it´s a much more subjective case.
Third: I mentioned before, people can become subject to harassment, and ESC is a hot potato to handle. There´s no need to make the jury public.
EBU won't change the televoting rules to 1 vote per number.
They need money from televoting of course, that's more important for them than who wins.
Yes, I know, that's the most difficult thing to change. But they could add a 50% jury vote, that would still mean they would get the money from the televoting 
EBU won't change the televoting rules to 1 vote per number.
They need money from televoting of course, that's more important for them than who wins.
Calabacines,
during our selection process for Eurovision, we always get to see the jury and we know who they are, during the Olympics we also always see the judges, why should this case be any different?
Mina, if you don´t know how the selection process works, you can´t call it shady. Maybe the best thing to do is just to contact the broadcaster and ask, instead of sowing distrust. I don´t think the jury members have to be made known. With publicity would comes pressure on them to react in specific ways or even worse, they can become subjects to hate mail if their choices are not supported by somebody.
Ok, that's true. It could be made public yes, but it doesn't really bother me if it doesn't
why a public jury-electing event? Do we know who's voting now?
We don't know but it would be impossible to know all the millions of people who vote. But when we're just talking about 8 people I don't see why it couldn't be made public.
After all those 8 people represent a country, too, not only themselves.
I see what you're saying, Muireanne, it would be difficult to keep track.
To be honest, I always vote for just one song so it doesn't bother me much, but I know people who tend to vote for 2 or 3 songs.
Mina,
Why shady? And why a public jury-electing event? Do we know who's voting now?
Jury selection is shady? Do you know how the process works?
No, that's why I say it's shady..lol. If there could be a special event for choosing the jury, where the public could be present if they wanted, I would support the idea more.
The list of 229 reactions is divided into 9 pages. Choose a page:
1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9
React yourself
This news article is older than one week. Reacting to articles is only possible in the first week after publication.
