KEiiNO Spirit In the Sky Norway Eurovision 2019

They were the undisputed people’s choice at Eurovision 2019. Yet despite scooping up 291 televote points — 30 more than the Netherlands in second — Norway’s KEiiNO didn’t even make the podium on Saturday night, having to make do with a fifth-place finish.

Many fans are rightly miffed at the discordance between the public and the music experts. And they’re not the only ones. Speaking to the Norwegian outlet VGthe trio’s male vocalist Tom Hugo questioned the need for juries at all.

Hugo says he’s not a fan, adding: “It is subjective what is good and bad, and then it is strange that a few people should sit and decide half of what a country should give as points”.

The “Spirit In The Sky” crooner goes on: “There have always been lots of rumours about jury members being bribed and such, and that is so stupid. So the scheme seems unnecessary. And I think maybe this will be a real debate on this now”.

“You were afraid that pure telephone votes could be manipulated. But now the technology has changed quite a lot”.

Lest people scream “sour grapes”, KEiiNO have already sent their congratulations to the Netherlands’ Duncan Laurence on Instagram: “CONGRATULATIONS! WOW, you were so amazing last night. We know how much you love music, and we are so happy that you won Eurovision Song Contest 2019! We really hope to see you again soon, and would love to visit The Netherlands next year!”

KEiiNO’s Jury Final Performance

One potential reason for the disparity in votes could be a technical issue which arose during Friday night’s jury final. The screen went black on two occasions and when the picture returned a cameraman was visible in the shot.

In the same VG interview, Tom says it is difficult to say whether the glitches made much of a difference.

“An email was sent to the jury with a note that they should not be influenced by the fact that the screen went black. But music is about creating a feeling, and when you don’t get continuity in the experience you can be unconsciously influenced”.

Norway’s Head of Delegation Stig Karlsen says the team are just focusing on the good result and the fact that KEiiNO topped the televote — “It’s amazing”.

Nonetheless, the TV exec was not best pleased by the EBU’s decision to reject both NRK’s initial request to perform again and the subsequent formal complaint. “We are disappointed with the decision, but the EBU must be able to make its assessments, and make the choices they believe are right”.

Jon Ola Sand responds to jury criticism

The EBU’s Executive Supervisor Jon Ola Sand tells VG that the current voting method works well and that there are no plans to change it. However, he is aware of the complaints from his fellow Norwegians.

In response, Sand reiterates that “those who sit on the jury are professional and competent and that all parties, including the broadcasters, are well pleased with the scheme”.

“What we have discussed is the weighting between audience voices and the jury. Now we have 50/50 and we think it works well”.

What do you think? Does the jury/televote split need to be reformed? Should the juries be axed completely? Let us know in the comments below.

Follow all of our Norway Eurovision 2019 news.

324 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
ben yo
ben yo
1 year ago

Juries are a double edged sword. On one hand they balance, on the other hand there is huge influence and possibility of fraud. If 5 out of 5 jury members give the same vote, and even all of them the lowest or the highest, again and again to the usual suspects, it is beyond hypocrisy to talk of professionalism here. I am thinking of ice skating juries or other sports where the highest and the lowest score are being erased. That could be an idea, with seven jury members that could make some more sense. And known enemies, if you… Read more »

Greta
Greta
1 year ago

It is strange that Norway’s song qualified to the final

Rasmus
Rasmus
1 year ago

if the public should only vote. Then San Marino should have been 10th. THATS THE REASON FOR NOT 100% televoting. Case closed

Lenchen
Lenchen
1 year ago

Thank god for the juries. Norway’s Song was basically just a fun song but it wasn’t “good”. If you look at the streaming charts right now “Arcade” is by far the most streamed from this years Eurovision and not the weird song from Norway. Yes, they won the televote but in the end people didn’t really care for the song. The right song won.

Robert
Robert
1 year ago

For the love of god i cannot understand what the role of the juries is (well except moving Sweden up the rankings i mean). It has been proven they’re even more biased than the televoters (i mean georgians actually voted for Russia, look what the georgian jury did) In the past decade all the televotig winners were very worthy, why is there a need for some no names to cancel millions of people’s (costly) votes. It is a complete nonsense. Norway were definetely not favourites of mine (while Netherlands were) but without a doubt they are the real winners

MARXANATIC
MARXANATIC
1 year ago
Reply to  Robert

imo the juries are there to balance the scores. The televote isn’t perfect either so they cancel out each other and the song that the both Juries and the televote agree that is a good song wins. I aknowledge that there are political votings but that usually doesnt affect who will win that much. Also since the introduction of the new voting system the winner was in the top 2 of the televote and never a winner of the jury without the televote agreeing

Sheldon
Sheldon
1 year ago

When public won’t vote at all, EBU will listen to the public opinion with regard to system they created. The power is in public’s hands.

Leo
Leo
1 year ago

ESC should really get rid of the odds and bookmakers. They are clearly influenced by the figures of music platform streams, YouTube views, etc … As a result juries are influenced by the odds and the good songs lose the appreciation that they really deserve. That’s why I believe that by keeping away from the odds might help the ESC being a fairer and non biased contest as it used to be.

eurofandom
eurofandom
1 year ago
Reply to  Leo

The EBU has nothing to do with odds and bookmakers. U got bookmakers on everything, world cup football, elections, price harry’s baby name, …… it’s the free market….

Elle
Elle
1 year ago
Reply to  Leo

Have said it many times, that someway Eurovision Youtube channel should ask YT to remove the view count till the end of the competition.

My number one
My number one
1 year ago
Reply to  Leo

I think the odds should be hidden and shown after the contest. for example the odds for semi 1 should be released the day after the semi 1 etc

Azuro
Azuro
1 year ago

Juries have got to go!
Music is subjective, it’s opinion based, your opinion is no more valid than mine and vice versa.
5 individuals should never be allowed to overturn 1,000s of others, especially when those 1,000s have been forced to pay.

The Norwegian song appealed to the most people across Europe, West Asia and Australia and therefore it is the rightful winner.

Marin
Marin
1 year ago

So, given what happened in the jury show, they were literally robbed.

Peti
Peti
1 year ago

Of course he would say that as they did great with the televoting. everyone competes under the same rules and premises. get over it.

Jake
Jake
1 year ago

Juries are a great idea, but the jurors aren’t professional. They have repeated failed in saving good songs and are extremely biased. It hasn’t happened yet, but what if Armenia and Azerbaijan giving each other 0 points meant that Armenia miss out on victory by 1 point, or Greece get 12 points from Cyprus to win by 1 point. Also, the way they overrate Sweden and Russia every single year is a joke. The system favours generic, inoffensive songs over more daring, experimental songs. I used to be a defender of juries at Eurovision, but the unprofessionalism and problems created… Read more »

Peti
Peti
1 year ago
Reply to  Jake

stfu.. the jurors are professionals within music

mark dowd
mark dowd
1 year ago
Reply to  Jake

Russian Jury: not ONE voter for Netherlands, Italy, Switzerland or Australia…pathetic. And Azeris and Armenians always placing each other last……this is what needs acting on. As for Belarus…!!!!!

Azaad
Azaad
1 year ago
Reply to  Jake

The jurors are the problem, not the system. Get vetted music professionals and increase the number on each jury

John
John
1 year ago
Reply to  Jake

Russia is overrated? Haha. Juries put Sergey into 9th place in 2019 (4th by televote) in 2018 they didn’t qualifying but 17th in juries and 11th in public vote. In 2016 juries put Sergey into 5th place (1st by televote) In 2015 Polina get 3rd place by the juries (2nd by televote) In 2014 Twins get 13th place in jury vote (7th by televote) In 2013 it was a very strange voting system but in overal 10th place for Russia by the juries (5th in televote) In 2012 Russia get 11th place by the juries and 2nd in televoting. A… Read more »

My number one
My number one
1 year ago

I’ll say it again, why not get like 20 or more juries from outside europe? That way they would vote based on the song, the voice and the staging and not which country is the most friendlier to them

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  My number one

Not a bad thought, actually!

My number one
My number one
1 year ago
Reply to  uwu vision

seriously we should have juries from the USA, Japan, South Korea, Canada, Brazil and China, the biggest music industries in the world (if we leave the european countries out)

Camilla
Camilla
1 year ago
Reply to  My number one

That’s actually a good idea

My number one
My number one
1 year ago
Reply to  My number one

lets sign a petition guys lol, even if im greek im so bored of this neighbor voting. like it has become expect-able

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago

“Those who sit on the Jury are professional” Two Jurors ended up writing their scores backwards, for god sake. These mistakes costed Poland’s in the final. Keep the Jury, sure, but make sure they know what they’re doing!

Also, I think there should be more jurors. Like… at least 20 in each country. It may be unrealistic though… (There are currently 5 for each country). I’m just not comfortable with only 5 people making half of a w h o l e country’s votes.

Briekimchi
Briekimchi
1 year ago
Reply to  uwu vision

But seriously, how hard is it to, when collecting the papers, point to the first country and say to the juror, “Hey, you’re sure this is your FAVOURITE song, right?”

Esc1234
Esc1234
1 year ago

I think what Jon Ola Sand means is “the system works well cause Bjorkman is happy, don’t give me any extra work”

I mean, can you imagine if Sweden complained? Don’t make angry the man who almost came last in 1992 xD

Tug
Tug
1 year ago

The 50/50 system is perfect. They are the rule of the game, if you don’t like them don’t play. There were so many better songs this year than the one from Norway. Now, what the EBU could do is to give a special price for the public vote and another for the jury vote, if different, so the winners would have a televised aknoweledgement.

Yaa
Yaa
1 year ago
Reply to  Tug

You must be Swed

DarkLord76865
DarkLord76865
1 year ago

Eurovision is not about which song is technically better, it is about what people want to listen. Juries would be OK if their votes were similar to televote ones, but they weren’t. There are also examples of juries political voting, when time came to Montenegro jury in the final they voted 12 pts for Serbia that have had only a few points before that, and also everyone knows that Serbia and Montenegro are friend countries. Juries should be removed and only televote – people should pick winner. You can’t say Netherlands song was better than Norway one.

Tug
Tug
1 year ago
Reply to  DarkLord76865

I disagree. The EBU is an organisation of public broadcasters paid to great extent, when not exclusvely, by tax payer’s money and who have a compromise to ensure quality and not only commercial accessibility. That is why jury was re-introduced to ensure a certain musical and visual standard and thank God for that.

Laia
Laia
1 year ago
Reply to  DarkLord76865

Can’t I? Let me try:
The Dutch song was (and is) better than the Norwegian song.
Hey, it was actually quite easy!
😉

John
John
1 year ago

Well we do need juries (cuz lets be honest it wasn’t winner material and San Marino didn’t deserve top 10) to balance it out but i do agree there need to be some chances to make them more honest.

But overall the top 10 ended nice

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  John

Despite Norway’s whole thing, I still like the Juries. They saved Albania last year and Czech Republic this year

Eurofan
Eurofan
1 year ago
Reply to  uwu vision

Yeah they saved them and destroyed so many others. There is always another side to every story.

Kat
Kat
1 year ago

They should increase the number of jury members in order to make the jury votes less subjective ! Like even 10 people or 20 per country. Should not be that hard to manage this

Filipe
Filipe
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat

They should be professional musicians, instead of journalists and tv stars! And we need also an internacional jury, with musicians from America or Asia.

Anna
Anna
1 year ago
Reply to  Filipe

Why from America or Asia?

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat

YES!

Azaad
Azaad
1 year ago
Reply to  Kat

Great suggestion. Rather than scrapping juries or reducing their influence, improve the quality and quantity.

Kat
Kat
1 year ago
Reply to  Azaad

Exactly

Bella
Bella
1 year ago

I don’t think the problem this year is with juries, the system could be slightly improved but it works well overall. I think the problem this year is that literally 7 songs have won something: – Iceland (won SF1 televoting) – Czech Republic (won SF1 jury vote) – Australia (won SF1 overall) – Norway (won SF2 and final televoting) – North Macedonia (won SF2 jury vote) – Netherlands (won SF2 and final overall) – Sweden (won final jury vote) If I’m not mistaken I don’t think this has ever happened before, and I think it just sets the stage for… Read more »

L'oiseau
L'oiseau
1 year ago
Reply to  Bella

Good point. I think that this year the quality of the songs was very even, which resulted in this disparity of results.

GaryH
GaryH
1 year ago

This is why I HATE the new way of showing the televote score. Because it became a way of ”hiding” the televote winner or at least taking focus away from the televote winner. In 2016–2018 everyone could actually see who won the televote, this year you had to remember the scores while it was happening. Shady EBU! Norway was screwed over just like Italy in 2015. No more of this!!!

Ps. Spain and Israel scoring so low with the jury was a crime. And Italy was the clear winner – why th did Sweden win the jury?!

Anna
Anna
1 year ago
Reply to  GaryH

why did Sweden win the jury?! > Same as like last year’s Austria..

Kat
Kat
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna

Well, this happens when the song appeals to most jury members and they rank it in their top3 and simultaneously the jury is in big disagreement of their top2
In this way sweden gets always high points although it was not the jurys favourite. I guess that’s the main reason why sweden and last year Austria won the jury vote…

Budwires
Budwires
1 year ago

The jury and televotes together bring a reasonably good balance. You can’t say the eventual top 10 is a bad one

Bella
Bella
1 year ago
Reply to  Budwires

Amen.

poe-tay-toe-chips
poe-tay-toe-chips
1 year ago
Reply to  Budwires

tbh i don’t think all 10 songs in the top 10 are deserving, so i can’t agree with you.

Miguel
Miguel
1 year ago

I agree with him. His answer is actually quite sober and respectful.

Its no news that the jury vote is more biased than the public vote.
The “professionals” are more concerned voting in the best songs and not their personal favorites, so they go for the obvious choices and bookies favorites. I wonder if it makes sense….
even more since the traditional friendly/neighbor votes happens also (even more) with the jury.

Norway was my winner, so I am happy they won the televote. I am also happy for Duncan. His performance was very good and he is a worthy winner.

Bella
Bella
1 year ago
Reply to  Miguel

The jury is NOT more biased than the public vote. Some juries are indeed biased, and btw this happens in countries where the televote is also very prone to political/neighboring bias: Russia/Belarus, Greece/Cyprus, Scandinavia, Romania/Moldova, etc. The problem is that people start obsessing over these few without looking at the big picture: most juries are WAY more objective than their televote. The EBU should definitely do something about it, but it is not a widespread issue. Look: – Belgian jury gave 12 points to Italy, not the Netherlands. – North Macedonian jury gave 12 points to Italy, not Serbia or… Read more »

Miguel
Miguel
1 year ago
Reply to  Bella

I strongly disagree with you. I am looking at the big picture. You are talking just about neighbors. That is the televote exchange of votes and doesn’t have a big influence in the final score. You only get 12 points from your neighbor once or a couple of times if you have more than one neighbor (Yugoslavia and URSS). Even if it unbalances the results it’s a just a little bit. While when ALL the juries vote for a song just because it is appraised by the media prior to the show, that has a more substantial outcome. Norway dropped… Read more »

Bella
Bella
1 year ago
Reply to  Miguel

I’m sorry but evidence completely contradicts what you’re saying: 1. In terms of political/neighborhood voting: it happens with some juries, but most of them are way more objective than their televote (I addressed this in my first comment). 2. You’re saying that neighboring vote doesn’t have a big influence on the final result. For most years, I agree with you but it CAN have a big influence: Russia won in 2008 only thanks to the former Soviet votes (look at the list of points received by Russia that year, it’s pretty obvious). 3. You’re saying that juries only vote for… Read more »

okan
okan
1 year ago

Turkey has already left using this as an excuse, I wouldnt be surprised if Russia left soon due to the same reason. Jury votes are terrible. You cant say only bad songs will win who are you to decideif that majority is believing winning song is great and deserves the 12 point? Are we happy that our winner this year got 2 12 points from televote and not enough from the jury. If we are deciding the taste of Europe then let the people choose their winner.

Petr
Petr
1 year ago
Reply to  okan

Seems highly likely that Russia will withdraw soon because the juries are so biased, especially in the countries that have political problems with Russia. Look at the Georgian jury score in the final. Everyone UNANONYMOUSLY scored Sergey 26th. What a joke? I understand that he might not have been the best that night. But worse than Germany and UK? You must be kidding. Juries were introduced to get rid of political voting, but in fact they are even more politically biased than televoters.

Preuss
Preuss
1 year ago

I mean, to everyone who’s Norwegian and bitter about the result, let’s not forget that the juries prevented us from flopping in 2014, 2015 and 2017 when we managed to reach the top ten

Peter
Peter
1 year ago

No it is not strange that few people decide 50 per cent. These “few” people know what they are talking about. The public votes more superficially whereas the jury is supposed to look more at quality. It is this combination that gives a good balance of quality and general appeal.

Kosey
Kosey
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter

So do you think Sweden was the highest quality song this year?

okan
okan
1 year ago
Reply to  Kosey

Apperantly they are the highest quality every year, at least top 3 even when they got 20 points from televotes

Søren Baunsgaard Hansen
Søren Baunsgaard Hansen
1 year ago
Reply to  Kosey

Yes

Anna
Anna
1 year ago
Reply to  Kosey

Sweden for some reason always gets many points from the jury, how bad the song may be… Don’t know why…

Jack
Jack
1 year ago
Reply to  Peter

These people should learn to give their scores right first.

Loin dici
Loin dici
1 year ago

By the way, there’s no thread on pointing about graphic design in the blog, but there’s something that I’m quite bugged about. Have you guys noticed how, since 2016, the lower thirds (that thing before the song starts) are emphasizing the countries’ name more than the song? It’s good for the reproducibility in mind, but it has become more about presenting the country rather than about the song. It’s even worse in 2019 with the lower third spans only for 2 seconds before reducting into the triangle. I prefer the way 2009-2012 did it by emphasizing the song and the… Read more »

poe-tay-toe-chips
poe-tay-toe-chips
1 year ago
Reply to  Loin dici

you have a point. The postcards already tell us which country a performer is from.

Héctor
Héctor
1 year ago

Don’t open that door Tom, you already knew it was 50/50 when you entered the MGP. If you don’t like the current system then don’t try Eurovision until it changes. Easy and simple. Anyway, do you really think you deserved to win Eurovision with other songs like”Arcade”, “Soldi” or “Truth” there? Don’t make me laught. Since “Spirit in the Sky” was released it became the fanwank of the year. So thank god we have juries to balance it. That said, the juries this year have proven to be everything but professionals, even voting in an more politically than its counterpart.… Read more »

Anna
Anna
1 year ago
Reply to  Héctor

The jury are stu*id because they didn’t chose your favorite? Maybe next year they vote for your favorite and then you’ll like the system…

Héctor
Héctor
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna

Lol, have you read some other news regarding the jury this year? For instance, Lina from Sweden voted the other way round from 26th to 1st, instead of 1st to 26th. Also, a Czech juror did the same in the SF. I think there are a couple more of similar situations this year… and that’s the reason behind Poland non-qualification. If it wasn’t for that mistake, Belarus would have been eliminated and Poland would have gone through. That is talking about the “technical” part of the voting, but if you take a look to the split results and how some… Read more »

Hans
Hans
1 year ago
Reply to  Héctor

Spirit in the sky is 1000 times better then Arcade and Soldi

Anna
Anna
1 year ago
Reply to  Hans

Com’on Hans. Get over it that your favorite didn’t win.
Soldi soldi clap clap… oooooh loving you is a losing game oooooooh

Erika
Erika
1 year ago
Reply to  Héctor

Arcade is just bad copy of the worst and the most boring band Coldplay

Héctor
Héctor
1 year ago
Reply to  Erika

It is not even the same style.

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  Erika

1. Coldplay songs and Arcade do not sound alike at all to me
2. I do not think Coldplay are boring and…
Neither do 27 million ( and probably a lot more) people. (Source, Coldplay monthly Spotify listeners)

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  Héctor

Regarding the top paragraph of your comment, that is absolutely not what Tom Hugo said. He said NOTHING about “Deserving to win” and the term “Fanwank” is just another word for “Song I don’t personally like, but a lot of people do, and i’m salty about it”. Imma be real, I get like that too, but I know damn well thats only MY OPINION and I gotta regard everybody else’s.

Héctor
Héctor
1 year ago
Reply to  uwu vision

I use the term “fanwank” as way to describe those tacky, cheesy and usually untempo songs that every average eurofan likes (I would say very gay instead of average but that would be considered offensive).

GIOLO
GIOLO
1 year ago
Reply to  Héctor

Soldi was the worst in the final… from Italy

Romania
Romania
1 year ago

I cant stop singing Spirit in the sky . Norway won people votes

Discoguy
Discoguy
1 year ago

I hate when say song is dated ???? What who are you to talk what is dated, which type of songs are good? Music can be good or bad , so in all type of music we have good and bad songs. People decided to loveme more this Norway type of music then boring ballads.

Chris
Chris
1 year ago

I think Norway is real winer this year. But the next year must change this voting, I think is very difficult for little countries to get many votes from public ( because all media make own favourites ). I didnt read nothing about N.Macedonia singer before, I heard first time her song on final, maybe not the best song but permormance and voice so strong. Is sad that we know before just about few singers. So then jury vote for quality or for neighbours and public just for favourites about which they read in blogs and wiwiblogs. If the next… Read more »

Killmouseki
Killmouseki
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

So The Netherlands are a big country for you? And please don’t forget 95% of the viewers have probably even never heard about Wiwiblogs or any other eurovision site.

Chris
Chris
1 year ago
Reply to  Killmouseki

Not just wiwiwblogs, also the newspapers,tv shows,euvrovision song contest facebook,instagram,betting. Tell me sincerly how many times you heard Macedonian song before the final or how many times you read about Tamara? Yes Netherland is not big but is rich country. Be real Macedonia, Albania, Slovenia, Czech, Croatia ,Montenegro dont have a lot of chance to win, if they send Arcade they will not win,everybody will talking hitsabout is boring. Power of media and money decide who will win. If Russia or Sweden sing this year Slovenian or Macedonian song, they will be in top 5

Killmouseki
Killmouseki
1 year ago
Reply to  Chris

The reason newspapers and others spent less time on the Macedonian song is maybe because the song on itself is nothing special. The singer sang great live on the contest, the song came more to life and was more compelling on stage than in her video, but that still didn’t make it a winner. Top 10, yes, but not a winner. And I don’t agree with the money remark. Of course bigger countries have more money to spend, but I’m pretty sure some of those smaller countries spend every year more money on their entrey than the Netherlands do.

Jinbeizaki
Jinbeizaki
1 year ago
Reply to  Killmouseki

Do you really think 95% of the viewers didn’t know who was the favorite come on! The commentators are presenting each act before they go on stage during the postcards. I can’t tell for other countries but (as mine did) I’m pretty sure every single commentator said that the Netherlands was the extra favorite judging by the almost 50% chance winning odds.

Killmouseki
Killmouseki
1 year ago
Reply to  Jinbeizaki

I never wrote that, I only said that the big majority of viewers have hardly read those Eurovision sites.

Anna
Anna
1 year ago

They wouldn’t say so if they had won…

Discoguy
Discoguy
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna

They win public hearts

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  Anna

Yes, because the questions would not have been asked. Is that a bad thing, necessarily?

Cedric
1 year ago

As much as I love Keiino and their song(s), he should stop being so butthurt. The rules of the ESC have been like that for years and he knew about it when they applied for MGP.

Fred
Fred
1 year ago

The thing with Norway is that this type of music has historically (well the last few years at least) not fared well at Eurovision. Look at Monsters last year, and there are plenty more examples in the recent past. That has given juries license to ignore it and mark these songs down without much risk of blowback. Unfortunately for them, they misjudged the public mood this year in spectacular fashion. And while Norway was the most extreme example, it was by far not the only one. To take just one other, the 48 points the juries gave to Iceland is… Read more »

he is not keiino
he is not keiino
1 year ago
Reply to  Fred

KEiiNO – Spirit In The Sky (2019) – Joik
Stella Mwangi – Haba Haba (2011)
Ilinca – Alex – Yodel It! (2017)

Jury doesn’t like such sounds, though televoters love them.
The stupid jury destroys songs that can be successful.

Discoguy
Discoguy
1 year ago
Reply to  Fred

People like this type of music, I listen all day Spirit in the sky

PP77
PP77
1 year ago

EBU must increase number members of juries from 5 to 16 (like in 80 s,90s).it not fair that 205 people have same power as 200 milions tv viewers.

uwu vision
uwu vision
1 year ago
Reply to  PP77

YES!

Charles
Charles
1 year ago

It’s also strange when one only questions about the juris … after founding out that one won the televote … Had these generic-almost-saara-alto-sounding-like never won such prize … we would not have this conversation. Everybody is only happy when the overall winning entry is also the televoting winner …

Discoguy
Discoguy
1 year ago
Reply to  Charles

Duncan didnt won jury and didnt won public votes, it is normal that people are dissapointed. We want to everything be like before, we want happy dancing songs. Only good ballad was Molitva from Serbia

MyEuroVision
MyEuroVision
1 year ago

I agree this system might not be ideal, but I don’t think there is a perfect system possible since it’s a song contest. It’s result is based upon subjective opinions instead of facts like in sports games. I think it will be best if all jurors sign an agreement that their votes are based on their musical expertise rather than political (or other) opinions. This will not stop political voting, but it might decrease it.

Nikki
Nikki
1 year ago

Allow me to rant for a bit A part of me understands why the EBU brought the juries back, as a safety net to keep the ever growing influence of the voting blocks and the diaspora vote on check. A voting from the head to compensate the voting from the heart of us televoters. In the surface you could say it is working. If you compare the statistics from 2000-2009 when no country western Serbia and south Denmark won for the whole decade while the 2010- 2019 winners that had been jumping all over Europe on a quite random way… Read more »

Emilia Clarke
Emilia Clarke
1 year ago

95% of the viewers probably aren’t even aware that Norway won the public vote.

It seems unfair that the jury winner and overall winner gets so much fanfare on the night and the televote winner got nothing at all.

Bram
Bram
1 year ago
Reply to  Emilia Clarke

I agree. whether you agree or disagree with the televoting and/or the juryvoting system, the songs should be announced by order of lowest points t highest points for televoting. That would give higher scorign countries and their voters the praise they should get.

Killmouseki
Killmouseki
1 year ago

I’ll repeat what I’ve already written in a previous post where Russia was complaining: Out of all the systems the mixed jury-televoting system is the most honest. It has it’s flaws but only jury or only televoting has a lot more flaws. Lots of younger people on here seem to forget how 10/15 years ago the only-televoting system had become a joke in half of the countries, it was so much influenced by the diaspora of other countries that people sometimes didn’t recognise the points of their own country anymore. Some western european countries f.ex. gave every single year their… Read more »

Loin dici
Loin dici
1 year ago

CRITERIA OF JURIES, AS STATED IN THE WEB -Members of the jury must not have been part of the jury in the previous 2 years; -Members of the jury must be at least 16 years old on the day they vote; -There may not be more than 1 Participating Broadcaster’s employee per National Jury; -Members of the jury must have a solid musical/artistic background and a relevant professional experience (such as singer, musician, composer, author of lyrics, professional in the TV/radio entertainment field, music critic/expert, dancer or choreographer); -Members of the jury shall be citizens of the country they represent;… Read more »

acp
acp
1 year ago

Honestly if I was the Polish Head of Delegation or whoever is in charge of Poland’s participation I would withdraw or ask them to be an automatic qualifier because what has happened to Tulia is disgusting. If I was them, I would be extremely upset and angry. I hope the EBU does something because it’s really not fair. And I’m from Spain and not from Poland. If i was Polish I would be going crazy!!

he is not keiino
he is not keiino
1 year ago

off topic
I was right all this time. Portugal colors red and green were not about Portuguese flag, but about Pal.. …ian flag. That makes H a t a r i more brave, even though I don’t really agree with them 100%. Nice try Conan, but was too little.

Safiya
Safiya
1 year ago

Juries were supposed to minimalize the effect of the “political” voting, but as we all know it doesn’t work and I’m not sure how it could be stopped. When it comes to KEiiNO’s technical issues – it could explain a lot, but the juries also ranked them quite low during their semi-final, so it seem it’s not only about technical problems. To be honest to me Eurovision now seems like a contest with several different awards to win. Of course the official winner is the most important, but winning in the televote or with the juries seems like a whole… Read more »

Veta
Veta
1 year ago
Reply to  Safiya

They had technical issues during semi-final jury rehearsals as well.

Camilla
Camilla
1 year ago

I like the system of 50/50 jury and televotes, however are we sure the juries are not as biased as the televotes? In the 10 years since 2009 when jury votes were introduced, the jury has given their 1st place to Sweden 4 times out of 10 (2012, 2015, 2018, 2019), and given Sweden higher points than the televotes 8 times out of 10 (2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017, 2018, 2019) How is that statistically possible?

Cissile
Cissile
1 year ago
Reply to  Camilla

Didnt Austria win the jury vote in 2018?

Camilla
Camilla
1 year ago
Reply to  Cissile

As far as I could see Sweden won it but I may be wrong

Camilla
Camilla
1 year ago
Reply to  Cissile

You are right Austria 1st, Sweden 2nd

diana
diana
1 year ago
Reply to  Camilla

Sweden didn’t win the televotes in 2018 or in 2019 (updated as North Macedonia won the final one)

Cissile
Cissile
1 year ago
Reply to  diana

Yes. So the juries only had Sweden first the 2 years that they won. At least one of those wins (Euphoria) was also heavily supported by the public.
Juries may not always agree with the public, but its not always Sweden thats unfairly high.

Africavision
Africavision
1 year ago

Just a suggestion… How about the EBU assembles an expert jury panel of music professionals from countries outside of (and without ties to) Europe and Australia, instead of having jurors from the competing nations? Having such a jury would mean that block voting will be a thing of the past. This would also ensure that all jury members are actual music professionals, having been screened thoroughly by the EBU (and not just random jurors submitted by broadcasters, who tend to have different agendas and rank countries, rather than ranking songs based on their merit… Hello Belarus, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Georgia, Moldova,… Read more »

Tibor
Tibor
1 year ago
Reply to  Africavision

Although in theory that is a good idea, but you cannot implement it. Imagine how outraged people would be, if some jury that isn’t even European killed their darling in their vote. Europe as a whole is still not impartial enough to let someting like this happen.

ESCFan2009
ESCFan2009
1 year ago

Bitter lemon.

jamescharles
jamescharles
1 year ago

Lol I think it’s fun that they’ll always be able to say the people preferred us over the winner. What I’ve always thought is wouldn’t be interesting is to add the televotes from all countries and then split up points by % of total votes received, rather than the usual points system. It would also then be easier to weight the vote slightly towards the televote – then again larger countries would get more of a say so this probably wouldn’t work, just thinking out loud (though I’m sure there is a way to weight it between larger and smaller… Read more »

Graham
Graham
1 year ago

The fact that the Georgian jury can unanimously grant Russia 5 zeros says something is fundamentally wrong and abusable with this process.

he is not keiino
he is not keiino
1 year ago

Article about KEiiNO = 137 comments
Article about Duncan = 9 comments
Why don’t you talk about the winner if you love so much the vote system?

Colin
Colin
1 year ago

Most people are (mostly) satisfied with the winner, while angry of placement of some other entry. By nature, most people tend to talk about stuff they don’t like or would improve. If they are happy, most just click “like”, or say “I agree” or something like that. Call it human fault, but that’s how it is. On YT song might have 75% of likes, but most highlighted comments will be compaining about something.

he is not keiino
he is not keiino
1 year ago
Reply to  Colin

Call it whatever you want, but this is another boring year, with a winner we’ll never hear about again, except when he will give the trophy to the next boring winner. And people are asking themselves why ESC doesn’t count on the international market…well, because juries are only meant to kill people’s taste. Meanwhile Serhat is laughing all the way to the bank.

Kosey
Kosey
1 year ago
Reply to  Colin

But this is an article dedicated to Norway but it is dominated by Netherlands voters? If a bunch of Norway fans posted on Duncan’s thread saying he did not deserve the win, I would think that was a bit sad.

pepe
pepe
1 year ago

Maybe you should have a look at esctracker which song people prefer and is leading the downloads and streaming charts. (Hint: it ain’t Spirit in the Sky)

Anna
Anna
1 year ago
Reply to  pepe

Because Arcade is a song you would listen to also the rest of the year. And the Norway song was a happy uplifting song mainly for the contest.

ALL Wei
ALL Wei
1 year ago

when in the proces towards the festival, esp from 9 of march when Arcade got released was getting steam You trolls were complaining that Duncan got soo much attention in articles and comments above other candidates in your eyes. The losers of the festival even if you have won the televote are more intended to complain their butthurt than from the WINNERS act!! and its never Good enough!!

Tibor
Tibor
1 year ago

Well, the article about Duncan winning has 1500 comments.

Kosey
Kosey
1 year ago
Reply to  Tibor

Slightly disingenuous – that was an article about the whole grand final result, not just the Netherlands.

Tibor
Tibor
1 year ago
Reply to  Kosey

This is an article about the jury vote, not just Norway.

Kosey
Kosey
1 year ago
Reply to  Tibor

Only a small bit at the end, it is mostly about Norway’s reaction to the jury vote.

Tibor
Tibor
1 year ago
Reply to  Kosey

But not the discussion. and that’s what the original post was about: the number of comments.

moramento
moramento
1 year ago

Firstly: sour grapes, there are always sour grapes
Secondly: A reform of the jury voting is definitely needed. I’m not knowledgeable enough, I think, to determine which way is best. But for sure abolishing any type of a professional jury is a bad idea.