Picture: Sarah Louise Bennett (EBU)/@SietseBakker (Twitter)

Eurovision fans have flooded social media ever since the EBU announced that juries will no longer help decide the semi-final results, giving televoters the sole responsibility to decide the ten qualifiers in each semi.

Among those responding to the news, EBU Reference Group member Sietse Bakker has defended the changes in the voting system. In an extensive series of tweets and replies, Bakker wrote that the changes will help improve the song contest. 

“To all Eurovision fans: abolishment of the language rule and the orchestra, introduction of a Semi-Final (and then another one), re-introduction of the juries, change in voting presentation, Australia joining… Contest still there, stronger than ever. Have a little faith!”

He confirmed that the decision was made by the Reference Group, a group of producers from the participating broadcasters who protect and develop the Eurovision format. Sietse was appointed as a member representing Dutch broadcaster NPO in June 2020. Producers from the host broadcaster stay in the group for two cycles because of their recent experience hosting. He’ll be replaced by a BBC producer after this year’s edition.

“This was a decision by the Reference Group, which is being refreshed with new members every year, balancing many years of experience with new perspectives.”

Voting irregularities in Eurovision 2022 played a part in the decision

Interestingly, Bakker underlined in one reply that the decision to move to televote-only semi-finals came as a direct result of the voting irregularities in last year’s contest.

After the last edition in Turin, the EBU alleged that six countries attempted to exchange points in semi-final two. The broadcasters from these six countries — Azerbaijan, Georgia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania and San Marino — have all denied wrongdoing.

Instead of sanctioning broadcasters who were in the wrong and tightening scrutiny over the jury voting process, the EBU seems to have opted to scrap the jury altogether for the semis. 

Bakker tweeted: 

“Following the unprecedented voting irregularities we saw this year, we looked at ways to protect the integrity of the competition. The problem occurred in the Semi-Finals, this was the best way to end it. Also, difference of who qualifies in public v. public+jury vote is minimal.”

In Dutch, Sietse Bakker added that the decision to change the voting system was based on the fact that the EBU cannot continue to cover up voting irregularities each year by disqualifying juries. He wrote, translated from Dutch: 

“Because of what happened last year, it should never happen again. The irregularities have been detected and the jury votes were disqualified, but you can’t permit such a thing every year. That’s why”. 

Juries will vote as a back-up in the semis

Juries will, however, still vote in the semi-final, but as a back-up for the televote. If something goes wrong with a country’s televote — system failure, for instance — the jury vote can be used in its place.

This system was also in place in the 2000s and used several times when countries could not broadcast the contest as a result of local emergencies or technical errors that occurred during the vote count. Some details still need to be resolved. One fan asked about whether the back-up jury vote will be made public. 

“[The jury] will still vote as back-up. Don’t know the answer to [whether the results will be released after the final], that’s one for later.”

What do you think about Sietse Bakker’s replies? Was the decision to remove the jury from the semi-finals just? Let us know in the comments down below!

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

179 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Dida
Dida
7 days ago

They should scrap the juries for the Final, too. That way they’ll make sure UK will not be pushed as the runner-up as they wanted in 2022 for the fact that a Big 5 country got so many 0 points all over the years (and it’ll happeb again, coz UK is only sending bland songs). Kudos to small countries like Albania, Romania, Moldova or San Marino who sent great tracks over the years, comparing to UK. Haha, if it wouldn’t been for automatic qualifiers UK wouldn’t have been a finalist for the last 20 years (same for Germany and Spain… Read more »

noqueen
noqueen
6 days ago
Reply to  Dida

Romania is one of the bigger countries in Europe, actually!

DavidJo92
DavidJo92
7 days ago

The problem with having jurors goes way deeper than the possible collusion that occurred last year. The music industries in Europe don’t exist in a vacuum, they are all interconnected. Take for example, Serbia. Their music industry is deeply interconnected with those of Croatia, Montenegro, N Macedonia, Bosnia & H, Slovenia and, to a lesser degree, Bulgaria. If you are a music industry professional on their jury, you have to be very careful with how you vote. If you don’t vote for one these countries, you potentially risk the ire of the broadcaster, the performers, the producers, etc. If their… Read more »

dfg
dfg
7 days ago

Noooooo, Portugal is going to suffer with this. They never qualified when it was only the public voting.

McRoro
McRoro
6 days ago
Reply to  dfg

We actually did. Both in 2008 and 2009 (although one of the qualifiers was picked by the judges). And even if Portugal didn’t get good scores back then, The Black Mamba and MARO proved to us that with a good song we will make it to the final. Unless our national selection is bad this year, I don’t think Portugal is in that much trouble

McRoro
McRoro
6 days ago
Reply to  McRoro

I mean one of the qualifiers overall in the semi finals. Not Portugal in specific…

LaVoixCZ
7 days ago

running order made by producers, the pre-recorded vocals, erasure of the semifinal jurors, randomly made-up sanmarino televote… the contest is ruined now and already can’t wait for the 2024 changes, i am expecting more people on stage allowed and more nonsense things instead of solving real problems correctly… not talking about the fact these producers (like a tweet of this one) think cancelled orchestra option is a good thing. is it so hard to do, idk… three jurors nominated by the EBU and three nominated by a public broadcaster for each country? a bare minimum. but no, instead of repairing… Read more »

Denis
Denis
9 days ago

Fans ruined the contest once. They will again..
But keep the faith MR Bakker

Fatima
Fatima
9 days ago

Why weren’t the EBU supervising the juries with more rigor? We already saw this in 2019 when they didn’t spot the reversed Belarusian vote. It was “Eurovision fans” who reported this, not the likes of Bakker and co. What were they doing in the 24 hours between the jury and find shows? We need more scrutiny of anomalous decisions in that period. It’s not a lot to ask.

BadWoolfGirl
BadWoolfGirl
9 days ago
Reply to  Fatima

That was a major embarrassment. How the hell do you let that slide? It never would’ve happened had the Belarusian jury just kept their mouths shut before the grand final.

Yeshoney
Yeshoney
10 days ago

Such a lazy organization. You have got so much money from the participating countries buy the only method you can do is remove them in the semi? What about the grand final, huh?

Dawid
Dawid
10 days ago

Just make sure juries are professionals. And no, stuff like TV personality hosting music show in your station, back up dancer to some ESC entry that didn’t get to the final and bass player from that one band that had one hit back in 80s. shouldn’t count as professionals

Ritoli
Ritoli
11 days ago

Off topic, the more I see pictures of the Eurovision 2022 stage, the more I come to the conclusion that it is one of the ugliest stages I have ever seen.

Ritoli
Ritoli
11 days ago
Reply to  Ritoli

The most beautiful stages are from 2011, 2014 and 2019… in my opinion..

noqueen
noqueen
10 days ago
Reply to  Ritoli

2009 and 2014 for me are the best ever

Frisian esc
Frisian esc
11 days ago

Next to a jury problem this is a broadcaster problem. They are the ones that make these fraudulent deals. How will it help us to have 5 or 50 jury members per country as long as these jury members are appointed by the corrupt broadcasters in question? The whole system needs to be reimagined and overhauled and the best for now would be to remove the juries both in the semi final and grand final.

Frisian esc
Frisian esc
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

Well if a broadcaster wants to cheat they’ll find a way to influence the jury. My point is how is a jury member appointed by a broadcaster known to influence the voting to be trusted? They’d still need to corrupt only half of the jury members to make the wished impact. And the broadcaster can pick whoever they deem obeyful to their demands. Meanwhile broadcasters who follow the rules have the droughtful task of making such a big selection process for jury members with experience in the music industry. At the end of the day what’s the benefit compared to… Read more »

Una
Una
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

What can EBU do to ensure that the televoting result per broadcaster is for real? Do they have someone to supervise the process or do they trust the broadcaster to do their thing?
I am talking particularly about AzerBUYjan, Georgia, Poland, Romania and San Marino (five of the irregular six of 2022).

Una
Una
11 days ago
Reply to  Una

They do everything to protect the brand as they should.
Imagine having people from the stinky six without Montenegro involved at high level in EBU. Yuck. Per interviews during 2020, some broadcasters’ international people involved in Eurovision don’t/ didn’t even speak English. Give EBU versus most broadcasters except for Denmark <3, Iceland or Finland to name just a few.

Jonas
Jonas
11 days ago
Reply to  Una

Azerbaijan’s punishment should have been to be banned from ever hosting. That’s all they’ve cared about, getting five hours propaganda. They couldn’t care less about the actual song contest. They’d lose all interest in winning if they couldn’t host, meaning they would stop cheating, or even better, disappear.

Jonas
Jonas
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

Baku 2012 was no better than Qatar 2022.

Jonas
Jonas
11 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

Mar-a-Lago 2033

Benito Camelo
Benito Camelo
10 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

Definitely! Qatar proved themselves as terrible hosts and, incidentally, ruined the sport with all of the scandals. And Baku 2012 was just its ESC equivalent.
The upside is that no one will turn around and see the Middle East for a while, as Qatar ruined everyone’s image there.

Frisian esc
Frisian esc
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

Yea, I specifically had Ictimai tv in mind while thinking about this xD

Una
Una
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

I don’t think 50 would be feasable to contract – too many and too expensive. The logistics would be insane. Their rankings must be verified and introduced in the system and such.

Una
Una
11 days ago
Reply to  Una

Eurovision is becoming very *expensive* thus some control over the results is needed, nevermind the “quality control” which should basically be the responsibility of the participating broadcasters.

Also, I’ve heard in interviews and read some ideas by people-in-the-know that there is “campaigning” going on for points. That “allegedly” includes winning the contest and *organizing* it.

They won’t get rid of the juries. No way. But there should be at least 10 members.

Una
Una
11 days ago
Reply to  Una

I don’t remember where to find all of them, sorry.

Una
Una
10 days ago
Reply to  Una

I understand your point of view. It’s ok.

Jofty
Jofty
11 days ago
Reply to  Una

Well not control to the extent that the following year’s contest is gifted to the preferred broadcaster of the powers that be.

Fatima
Fatima
9 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

Hang on Frisian, that’s not re-imagining, that’s simply going back to the 2008 system which delivered a Russian landslide. And if there is such certainty about corrupt broadcasters, just kick them out. That really would be an overhaul.

1998
1998
11 days ago

Difference is minimal? Just look at the 2011 split results…

Tylos
Tylos
11 days ago

“Juries are irreparably corrupt and we can’t control them. So we’re only going to have them for the Grand Final”

Milan
Milan
11 days ago
Reply to  Tylos

Exactly my point – they are doing everything except what should be done.

Milan
Milan
11 days ago

What a braindead statement. If you wanted to remove voting irregularities why not just kill all jury members before the contest?

Not good
Not good
11 days ago
Reply to  Milan

This comment seems to be the braindead statement, lets not start being savages with our words.

Milan
Milan
11 days ago
Reply to  Not good

Perhaps my example was too crude so you misunderstood me. I just wanted to point out that they didn’t do the obvious thing – apply the rules, punish the broadcasters whose juries were corrupt and go on. We shouldn’t dismantle the police if we find that several policemen are corrupt!

Not good
Not good
11 days ago
Reply to  Milan

No worries, I do agree with your opinnion although the choice of word made it seem more than harsh at first glance.

NickC
NickC
11 days ago

I guess the problem is if there are nasty juries in the final, it can be fixed after the event (it will just change the ranking), but corruption in the semis may lead to some cheater qualifying for the final over someone deserving, and it is not fixable. ROW voting is the best idea ever.

Dope
Dope
12 days ago

Instead of putting fines to these countries that have been cheating, we’re going around to fix the problem?

It’s like we would just put a sticker on top of a hole in the wall to cover it up.

Dope
Dope
12 days ago
Reply to  Dope

Personally I’m okay with the change, but if a country cheats there should be consequences. Juries have seemingly been the biggest neighbourhood voters usually, so they haven’t been that pure with their votes either.

Mark
Mark
12 days ago

“Stop pissing the people off?” The viewship grew under the current jury system.

Mark
Mark
12 days ago

Anyone who thinks this is a good idea doesn’t remember the dark days of 2000s Eurovision

Héctor
Héctor
12 days ago

Yeah, but with only the televote neither “Mall” or “Midnight Gold” wouldn’t have qualified, just to name a few… I’ll let that sink in.

I agree some jurors are nasty and have political reasons behind but I don’t think abolishing them was the solution. I like the ROW voting though.

GojoSatoru
GojoSatoru
11 days ago
Reply to  Héctor

Grammatically it is “..neither Mall nor Midnight Gold would have qualified..”

Marcin
Marcin
12 days ago

Might as well bring back the one semi-final rule if we are getting rid of the jury. Global viewers are now able to vote? Sounds quite silly for me that someone from a non-participating country from South America can vote. The only positive I can see from this is a possible return of Turkey. A much better idea would be to bring back the 50/50 rule introduced in 2010. That would keep things fair and balanced.

Mark
Mark
12 days ago
Reply to  Marcin

Turkey isn’t in the contest because they deem the show to be too ‘Gay’

Jofty
Jofty
11 days ago
Reply to  Mark

Just like Hungary who in my view submitted two of the “gayest” entries ever in 2009 and 2011.

Benito Camelo
Benito Camelo
10 days ago
Reply to  Jofty

Hungary’s case is a very stark contrast. Personally, all Hungarians I’ve met are quite open-minded unlike their r*ssian vassal govt

Jo.
Jo.
12 days ago

not in the grand final ofc, they don’t want it to look like there’s still too much neighbor voting

Fatima
Fatima
12 days ago

Borderline condescension from Bakker. After bleating about the evolution of the contest, he should admit this is a step back, to 2008.

Frisian esc
Frisian esc
12 days ago
Reply to  Fatima

Condescending to who?

Frisian esc
Frisian esc
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

But we arent eurovision jury members? I don’t see any condescension what so ever in his statement.

Fatima
Fatima
11 days ago
Reply to  Frisian esc

“To all Eurovision Fans”, as he put it, before listing past developments which he must know remain unpopular with many of us

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Fatima

He always has that smirk on him. Like I know better than you..
He always felt condescending since being announced as producer. Good he will be replaced soon

Denis
Denis
11 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Also I find it funny and more condescending that he says “oh,Eurovision semifinal was a change too”. As if that is the same.
Adding semi final and then two semi-finals was probably one of few changes every ESC fan actually liked since we got more of ESC..

Gurl
Gurl
12 days ago

So instead of removing the juries from the semifinals why not try fixing the situation, since they admit the decision was taken after this year’s irregularities? The issues will persist in the final.

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago
Reply to  Gurl

It’s an unfixable situation.

Mark
Mark
12 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

The solution would be the have more jurors not none.

Whisker
Whisker
11 days ago
Reply to  Mark

Why do people insist that this is a “jurors” and/or “number of jurors” issue?

Denis
Denis
11 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

In this case jurors was the issue.
And more jurors could help. 10 members could improve.
Removing said countries jurors would also helped. Or sanctioning broadcasters. Anything but removing them

Whisker
Whisker
11 days ago
Reply to  Denis

It’s just not possible that jurors from six countries such a stunt/fraud. It required making the decision, counting points, coordination and such. The jurors of the horrible six of 2022 should be banned tho for as long as juries will be a thing in the festival.

Una
Una
11 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

You are right. The moves were “unprecedented”.

Jofty
Jofty
11 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

Do you think they might have got away with it though if they hadn’t had the cheek to place Sweden last? That’s probably what sent the algorithm into overdrive.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago

What juries? Did these results come from the EBU?

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

Ireland didn’t deserve last. If live instruments had been allowed, maybe it would have been different. I just looked on Wiki, two countries actually used juries and Serbia got just one point from them.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

Poor Dervish. They did The Voice before Eimear Quinn, in the version first sent to RTÉ. Eleven years later they come last.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

I don’t feel too bad, though, because the man who wrote the lyrics, John Waters, is horrible.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

A conservative newspaper columnist, with some disturbing opinions. He has a page on Wiki all about him, if you want to read it. He is the opposite of the movie director John Waters, who is wonderful, and gave Hairspray to the world.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

She even recorded All Kinds of Everything once.

HarpyDarper
HarpyDarper
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

A bit like Graham Linehan? I was a big fan of him, enjoyed reading his opinions about comedy and writing but he went doolally the last few years. Still, separate art from the artist.

Dervish are obviously very talented, but she had a bad night vocally and the performance was awkward and they were simply forgotten about. But I did enjoy their other NF song, Until We Meet Again

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  HarpyDarper

I suppose so, there are a lot of morons out there. Graham Linehan is in the JK Rowling set. I don’t know much about him, apart from Father Ted. Which I liked.

Jofty
Jofty
11 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

He entered a song in Brian Kennedy’s year, 2006. It did not make the final so he threw a massive hissy fit. But RTE indulged him and the song was performed on The Late Late Show the week after the contest. It was absolutely awful, from memory a woman just saying goodbye in a lot of foreign languages.

Jofty
Jofty
11 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

They should roll her out to do the usual “medley” with Eleni, Mans and Verka.

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago

“Have.a little faith”? A BIG MORBIDLY OBESE *NO*! NO FAITH AT ALL!

noqueen
noqueen
12 days ago

Out of topic, just looking at the article’s picture and that’s an ugly a33 stage! wow!

Jesper Hjellnes
Jesper Hjellnes
12 days ago

It could make sense as not that many people watch the semifinals, therefore fewer votes will come in, so they now will do the semifinals with 100 % televote. Here in Norway, usually there are twice as many who watch the grand final than the semifinal we’re participating in

Mark
Mark
12 days ago

The fans watch the semi finals, which means the finalist will be decided by the fans. And as we know, the fans loved the worst kind of songs. And I predict the moniker of ‘Eurovision is trash’ will return and the contest will lose all the credibility it gathered over the past decade.

Una
Una
12 days ago

Well they did share that the *irregular voting patterns of 2022 from the semifinals* was a reason to remove the juries. Because of AzerBUYjan, Georgia, Montengro, Poland, Romania and San Marino, that is. I cannot wait for them to start complaining. Yuck.

Now I’m thinking that not disclosing the number of viewers’ votes per country *does* actually make sense. It can help keeping away countries like AzerBUYjan (as per the televote sims students scandal of sorts published in the media at least by the BEEEEEEEP) from trying to influence the results through televote.

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

No we don’t. We just talk about the obvious or the less obvious but out in the public sphere nonetheless.

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

We are! We are!!

We are maaade of staaars … !!!

Denis
Denis
12 days ago

So no more tickets for jury shows ? And the last general rehersal that used to be the jury show now will be just a regular rehersal?

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

They can still sell tickets because the semis shows must be recorded as contingency.

Backup plans are needed in case the televote does not work. I cannot remember how it’s been done in the past. It must have been backup juries in the era of 100% televote.

EBU, what would be the plan in case that the televote fails in two countries of the same pot??

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

Hmm! I know that Russia and Bosnia used jury voting until 2004 because their telecommunications were not that developed yet. And the saying goes that in 2007 the German entry which did not impress voters, made quite an impact with backup juries and was even close to winning it had juries voted

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Easy listening, be it swing like Germany in 2007 and 2009 (U.K. jury helped it get 7 points to Norton’s bemusement) or waltz-tempo balladry like Cyprus 2015 and Switzerland 2022 are the biggest losers from this change. I hope it wouldn’t undermine the enjoyment of older listeners (I’m merely 28, but ESC is great as there’s always entries your parents could like)

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

RIP, Roger Cicero

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Serbia would still have won even with juries. Because it really was the best song in a horrible edition. But Ukraine would not be runner up..
I kinda enjoyed the German entry. Not my type of music but it was nice. Different. Definitly better than only 17th place.
If anything juries have opened up for more different styles to appear in the contest and I fear that might be lost

Briekimchi
Briekimchi
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Good to know! I actually have Germany as my second place that year, one spot about the amazing Molitva. I remember Germany being the strong favourite to win before the contest, too.

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

I now remember a Eurovision Again edition when Ireland presented jury instead of televote points unlike nearly all countries. But I can’t remember why. Maybe the televote had crashed.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

1999, Slovenia got the 12.

Elena
Elena
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

No, here in Russia we had a public vote that year. I definitely remember that

Mark
Mark
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Molitva was the least bad song that year. The entire decade was full of garbage songs. And the televote supported the trash.

Jesper Hjellnes
Jesper Hjellnes
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

You’re right. They used back up juries when the televote failed in the years before 2016

BadWoolfGirl
BadWoolfGirl
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

I think the jury shows will now just be another rehearsal

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  BadWoolfGirl

They’ll still be jury shows if there’s a back-up jury system.

Jillian
Jillian
12 days ago

Finland would’ve been in the final 3 times without the jury in 2010, 2015 & 2017 Other countries not getting into the final because of the juries (twice): Belarus, Bulgaria, Croatia, Lithuania and Poland Azerbaijan wouldn’t be in the final 3 times without the jury 2014, 2015 & 2022 Other countries getting into the final because of the jury (twice): Albania, Denmark, Estonia, Georgia, Hungary, Israel, Malta & Swizerland Two countries Lithuania & Poland with big diaspora vote, could be taken away from the list of who got hurt most by the jury. Overall we can probably all agree that… Read more »

Yikes
Yikes
12 days ago

IctimaiTV is discussing their SIM-card budget for next year as we speak

Kim
Kim
12 days ago
Reply to  Yikes

It’s not funny but that did make me laugh

Polegend Godnova
12 days ago

now you’ve said it, ari! anyone with self-respect shouldn’t be okay with 200 people (half of whom have no better music knowledge than the average person) deciding half of the results lmao.

Briekimchi
Briekimchi
12 days ago

^ This.

Just look at the list of some of the people asked to be Eurovision jurors. Not going to shame any particular name but seriously…

Polegend Godnova
12 days ago

they should’ve never been introduced in the semi-finals to begin with. the semis should be where the paying public decides who to see again in the grand final. also, it’s not surprising groups of 5 people are so easy to corrupt (especially when so many of them aren’t even music professionals), but at the same time it’s impossible to bring more jurors per country because those people need to be paid.

Una
Una
12 days ago

Let us remember problems with the jury members in the recent years that have been made public:

  • ranking countries upside down.
  • disclosing how they voted or would vote in interviews.
  • alleged collusion between members of the same jury voting as if they were following the party line.
  • blatant neighbour or cozy friends (AUS-BEL-SWE, allegedly) voting.
  • *irregular voting patterns of AzerBUYjan, Georgia, Montenegro, Poland, Romania and San Marino).
  • etc.
Una
Una
12 days ago

But juries are accountable. They work for the public broadcaster and get taxpayers’ money for it. They effing provide the sheets with the ranking which are verified and signed by one or more people.
The televote can be cultural and that’s a fact – how can one control thousands of votes if not paying for each vote?

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

They are accountable.

Eurovision will happen again and they will all go on another all-expenses paid trip. Just look at what happened with the *irregular voting patterns*. AzerBUYjan, Georgia, Poland, Romania and San Marino still participate.

That public broadcasters reward or ignore stuff is something different.

Polegend Godnova
12 days ago

oh i agree with you that it should be 100% televote in the final as well. this is just the first step towards a jiury-free eurovision!

Jonny
Jonny
12 days ago

mass televoting for Ukraine”

This cannot be changed, except there is 100 % jury voting.

Vivian
Vivian
12 days ago

While at first I thought this was a good idea… I’m starting to have doubts. If this were implemented sooner, we’d have seen Mall fail to qualify and yet Sekret would’ve made the cut. That’s an absolute no-go in my opinion. I also fear that the whole diaspora thing will make things worse too. On the bright side, maybe Sweden will get that push to actually send something worth qualifying for a change. We haven’t seen that in a long time.

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Vivian

again you and you and anti-Sweden rants..
Get your facts checked, Sweden has reached top 10 with voters every year except 2008. Which means that people clearly thought they were worthy of qualifying..

Vivian
Vivian
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Even so… Sweden is known to send jury bait all the time. The same goes for Azerbaijan really

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Vivian

? Sweden still does well with voters, year by year. They are not there because only jury likes them

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

So? It is not like Sweden struggles every year and only gets through thanks to juries

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

The question was about semifinals. And yes Sweden has done very well in semifinals, even without juries. There is no need to chuckle about not making it through because nothing supports it..
Overrated? Maybe some years. But some countries are Overrated by the voters. How come Italy almost every year reach top 5 with voters but rarely with juries? Is that much better?

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Power to the people? It is not parliamentary elections. It is a contest..

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

I contest this “contest”!

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

Is it really a contest? A popularity contest? The televote screams “popularity”.

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

This is what you wanted. The juries gave Ukraine 192 points, the televote gave Ukraine 439.

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

It’s definitely NOT a contest! It’s a festival/musical event/sham. The televote is the least offensive part since people vote for the songs and performances they actually enjoy unless they are from AzerBUYjan.
EBU, what’s the result of your investigation of the AzerBUYjan televote in 2021 and 2022?

Jonas
Jonas
12 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

Spain got twenty times more points than Iceland this year. Is this because they were twenty times more popular, or because Chanel fans voted twenty times and Systur fans voted only once? How is that fair?

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

EBU should have the answer to that. I’d go for “they were twenty times more popular” tho, SloMo had a super wide appeal and the performance was absolutely fantastic.

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago
Reply to  Whisker

I’m very happy for Chanel and the dancers and the songwriters. RAI messed it up big time and that’s on them. Who knows what the final results would have looked like had the sun worked properly,

Una
Una
12 days ago
Reply to  Una

I don’t mind it. It’s heartbreaking.

Lost in Verona
Lost in Verona
13 days ago

I get the concern about eventual irregularities in the future, but imo they should use the 2009 system – in that year, the 10 qualifiers of both semi finals were perfect, I wouldn’t change any of the qualifiers for some that didn’t qualify (u guys might disagree with me).
I think it is important to have both perspectives (from the public and the jury) somehow, even in the semifinals. It would be sad not seeing Albania and Belgium in the Grand Final back in 2021 (though it was heartbreaking not seeing Cyprus in 2022).

Stranger
Stranger
13 days ago

I really really wish they’d go back to random draws.

The producers can use the excuse that they want to even out the show all they like, but at the end of the day, the final running order is predictable these days and the producers can give that extra push to whoever they personally want to win. What is the fun in knowing that either song 9-13 or 19-26 is going to win? In my opinion, they should bring back completely random draws.

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Stranger

In 2011 the final had 4 depressing or low tempo songs in its first 4 songs and than 6 party bops. This was very, very uneven and no one wants the final to open with a depressing tune, nor such an uneven distribution of highlights. Even with last year and 2015 (and also parts of my fictional 2020 running order) they tried to have as much contrast with what they had, eg have Belgium (2022) or Latvia’s (2015) songs in the middle of this run

Little Miss Sassy
Little Miss Sassy
12 days ago
Reply to  Leo

If choosing between fairness and 5-10 minutes of boredom, I’d definitely choose the former.

Leo
Leo
12 days ago

It would be more boring for 4 ballads to be grouped together than the producer led approach right now where there’s octane filled starts and ends and an approach that aims to be as even as possible (though there are still some problems like 6th slot for Destiny, straight after Manizha, those are a minority – I mean, having Sam between the two Sam Smith soundalikes was the best thing that could have happened to him).

Stranger
Stranger
12 days ago
Reply to  Leo

The issue with this is it is incredibly boring knowing more than half of the songs will not win because of where they are placed in the final. Without the producers picking running order, the winner remains a question mark. In recent years, anybody could’ve guessed the winner in 2021 would be France or Italy, or Ukraine/UK/Spain purely because of where they were placed.

I guess it depends – do you find it boring being able to guess the likely winner, or do you find it boring sitting through 3-4 songs of the same genre (which is not guaranteed).

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Stranger

In many cases, it’s still to do with the song, and only maybe Czech, France and Armenia and mayybeeeee Greece suffered from their slots, which have still produced plenty of top 10 entries and televote faves even after producers came in.

Midnight Gold
Midnight Gold
12 days ago
Reply to  Stranger

They could reduce that impact by having countries be placed in 3-4 groups instead of halves before they decide the order. There wouldn’t be such a big difference if you only had 1-6 or 7-13 as possible spots instead of 1-13 as is the case right now.

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Midnight Gold

Not that bad an idea actually. Or have a mixture where a draw is used to determine halves for 10 heat 1 and 8 heat 2 but the producers decide slot for the last 2 with the aim to boost both (I did this with mine for 2020)

Whisker
Whisker
12 days ago
Reply to  Stranger

Random draws should be the next step. Viewers that are interested in the festival will watch the show random draw or not.The producers should set the criteria as to props and such so no performance requires more time for setting up the staging than others. Manipulating the draw is doable so go random already.

Benito Camelo
Benito Camelo
13 days ago

I think this is a miss, juries – despite their flaws, were a really nice balance for the contest and tbh I don’t feel okay about the televote being handed the whole voting power.
I do agree that something had to be done about this year’s jury scandal, though.

ESC8
ESC8
13 days ago

I have a suggestion for the Wiwibloggs You can create a poll where we will be able to vote whether we prefer the country that qualified because of jury support or the one that would’ve qualified instead, from 2010 to 2022 As an example, for 2022, we will vote between Azerbaijan and Cyprus. Had it been 100% televoting Cyprus would’ve qualified, and Azerbaijan would’ve been out. The same for the other semis. The difference usually is just one country, however I remember that in 2011, the overall qualifiers were different than the televoting top 10 by 3. Armenia, Turkey and… Read more »

Jake
Jake
13 days ago

So instead of paying off juries they’ll just buy those credit cards and load the vote from smaller countries. Also they can still buy off juries in finale. So that doesn’t fix anything. Maybe ebu should pick juries themselves and keep names secret vs letting broadcasters pick them

Alfie28
Alfie28
13 days ago

No checks and balances in the jury, except for the ones they make for themselves.

Rifki
Rifki
13 days ago

the problem is by some people in the jury panel, not the juries as a whole. so it is not the broadcasters as a whole that are to blame. a better solution is to ban/prohibit those particular jurors (i.e. those particular people who cheat) from their involvement in Eurovision, either forever or for very long years. I mean, members of the jury panel always change every single year, don’t they?

Leendert Jan
Leendert Jan
13 days ago

I am pretty skeptical still since overall I think the 50/50 system works really well, but I’ve delved a bit further in the results of the last couple years and it must be said that the difference wouldn’t have been as big as I thought. In the last 5 contests, 2017-2022, in all but one semis there would have been one country that qualified with only the televote which didn’t qualify in the current 50/50 system, while in the semi 2 of 2017 there would have been 2. So not that different, and in the end the winner will be… Read more »

Jonas
Jonas
13 days ago
Reply to  Leendert Jan

It can make a difference in other ways. Bands like Hooverphonic might tell themselves not to worry, the juries will put us through, we’ll be fine. Whether it’s true or not might not matter. Now they might not take the chance.

BadWoolfGirl
BadWoolfGirl
12 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

Fans often grumble When a fan favorites on the like does it make it through to the final because the jurors didn’t place it in the top 10, but now with 100% televote, if something they like doesn’t make it through, they’ve only got themselves to blame.

Sir Stevia
Sir Stevia
12 days ago
Reply to  Leendert Jan

Yeah many people seem to have forgotten that Lithuania and Poland were robbed of a grand final spot because a couple of juries voted backwards… I did not like either of this entries and much preferred Denmark and Belarus that year but it was still a literal robbery.

Only 2018 here would have been worse off without juries in the semi IMO.

BadWoolfGirl
BadWoolfGirl
12 days ago
Reply to  Sir Stevia

I haven’t. I will admit I would’ve personally preferred Poland in the final over Belarus in 2019, but I didn’t really I like Lithuania’s Song that year, so I didn’t mind it not qualifying. I wasn’t overly keen on Denmark entry either, but there wasn’t anything else That could’ve made the top 10 that night (I would’ve preferred Armenia, but that performance was a mess so I clearly didn’t think it was gonna make it). Speaking of Lithuania, when you look back at its History with 100% televoting in the semi finals, it didn’t really do that well. They missed… Read more »

Eurovision fan
Eurovision fan
13 days ago

I really like these new changes. The reason why they ditched the jury for semi-final, but kept them in the final is primarily because this year’s issue with jury originated from semi-final, like most other malversations with jury. For any argument against these changes you can find counter-argument and example that contradicts that statement. Lithuania and Netherlands had much better televoting score than Albania this year for instance, Poland had extremely bad televoting score in 2021 just like Armenia in 2019 despite having big diaspora, and Citi Zeni had more jury points than televoting points, even if it is jokey… Read more »

Denis
Denis
13 days ago
Reply to  Eurovision fan

Then why bothering having juries at all if they are removed from semi- finals?
And surely it would have been better to reform jury and tightening the control over it rather than skipping it, don’t you agree?
All it tells us is that EBU can not find ways to scrutinize voting and took the lazy way out..

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

The influence of bloc voting in the semis is reduced by blocs being split, as said on the ESC website, hence why there’s less need for counterbalance in semis

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Leo

Yeah but it still pointless having juries in final if they are removed in semis..
Then juries should have been removed altogether!
And there will still be block voting. If three Nordic countries are in the same semi you bet they will all give 12 points to each other, and if Ireland UK can vote for Lithuania they will give Lithuania 12 points like they have these years

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Lithuania, who were still nowhere in sight in 2017 despite Irish, Norwegian and Estonian support, sometimes eclipse Nordic nations like Iceland. Plenty of Nordic entries have struggled for votes from neighbours or not even got them, like Denmark in 2017. Also even on televote alone, Icebreaker and Walk-in’ out would have still tanked. And the uneven 2007 format led to plenty of fan and OGAE faves from the west ranking out despite excellent genre diversity and one of the strongest ever top 3’s.

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Leo

and even with juries the final outcome will still be more influenced by voters thanks to Rest of The World. So why even have juries then?

Leo
Leo
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Rest of world will just add 12 more points. All votes from outside the ESC will come together as a single “country”

Denis
Denis
12 days ago
Reply to  Leo

Which still leads to a marginally larger sway of votes from voters. And who knows what Americans will vote for?
As I said if ther was a problem with juries reform them. Do not remove them!

BadWoolfGirl
BadWoolfGirl
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

Will there even be enough Americans voting to influence the rest of the world scoring because eurovision is still pretty niche in this country. The American song contest didn’t really do that well and I would be surprised if there’s a second season. And Eurovision 2016 onward is blocked on YouTube in America unless you’re ready to shell out a peacock subscription for 2021 and 2022 contests. It’s kinda hypocritical to ask people outside of Europe to vote when they can’t even see the contest freely online!

Denis
Denis
13 days ago

Not buying it. You mean that a group of 15 people instead of reforming and tightening the jury votes decided to abolish it? So they took the lazy way out is what he is saying..
I wonder what new perspectives was brought up in that discussion? Did no one consult broadcasters and fans before deciding? Excitement for ESC just got less exciting and it was not high to begin with after the results

Skdkf
Skdkf
13 days ago
Reply to  Denis

How are they supposed to “tighten jury votes” it’s not as if they can afford to send a worker to each member country and track the jury members so they don’t get contacted by another country it simply wouldn’t be feasible economically and ethically

Denis
Denis
13 days ago
Reply to  Skdkf

well, you mean to tell than an organization can’t scrutinize their own voting? Control it?
Just use a controller for each jury member, confirm the votes are actually valid and there you have it..

Skdkf
Skdkf
12 days ago
Reply to  Denis

But then we’d have more countries withdraw because the costs would increase again to afford controllers and then in order to actually confirm valid results they would have to go through jury member emails, text messages etc which wouldn’t be ethical

Vamoss
Vamoss
13 days ago

Nice so its time for Azerbaijan, Malta and Australia to stop sending jury bait songs.

P.S i predict that all 3 of them wont be in the final in 2023

Jose Uribe
Jose Uribe
13 days ago

But then we’d have suspicious televote numbers. Anyone else suspicious about how low-voting countries like Czechia often give their televote points to Azerbaijan? My guess is it’s easier to change the overall results with less SIM cards when there’s already low voting figures.

Midnight Gold
Midnight Gold
13 days ago

Many years of experience and new perspectives means getting rid of it altogether because you can’t be bothered to run it properly, got it.

Zisk
Zisk
13 days ago

I’m not sure a rigged jury is any less fair than getting 12 points because you have diaspora somewhere.

Jonas
Jonas
13 days ago

I replied, but it’s disappeared into the moderation system. As usual, I made an excellent point.

Jonas
Jonas
13 days ago
Reply to  Jonas

No, none of those things. Mostly just that reform is better than abolishment.

Jonas
Jonas
13 days ago

Jurors can be corrupt idiots, this is true. The same can also be said of government ministers, presidents and heads of state. The trick is to pick the right people. Should the White House be demolished just because Donald Trump got in? 10 Downing Street just because Liz Truss got in?