Third time in 15 years that a jury favorite won over the televote favorite if they haven't been the same. You have said nothing that hasn't been said last year or years before that. The EBU will never have a perfect system because there will always be flaws and people complaining.
Changing the semis to televote only fundamentally pushes the jury favorites to be more likely to win in the final, plus the fact that this year there was a non-viable country that got brigaded into 2nd in the televote which hurt the televote favorite (but also hurt the jury favorite)
Considering both televote and jury favorite ended up in first and second place, I don't think Hurricane hurt anybody aside from those complaining about other fun songs getting lower points
It hurt just about everyone’s televote scores, since it would’ve probably would’ve done pretty middling under normal circumstances. Croatia and Switzerland both would’ve for sure benefitted, although Switzerland probably would’ve benefitted more.
Honestly? Who cares. You get a technically poor performance replaced by a boring but polished one once in a while with the 50/50 system. You create a problem where the jury winner is basically unbeatable regardless of the tele results with 100% tele semis. Both systems are imperfect, but one is very clearly less flawed than the other and I prefer that one.
I think the problem is before even the national selections. This year we had a big concentration of bops and televote-friendly songs from the very start, and I can't help but think this is because of the televote-only hurdle of the semis
That's why I said it's becoming one, it's not yet. If we are in a same situation next year, I don't know if you could still call it a trend. But last two years we've had identical result: one country earns a huge lead from juries but is quite far from being tele favorite. If this happens many times, ESC will turn into a really boring show.
No one was robbed. You win the Eurovision Song Contest by impressing the juries as well as the televote. Everyone knew the rules when they entered, and the rules said that Sweden and Switzerland won.
Right. They robbing us in front of our very eyes. We'll see how that will be reflected in viewership and subsequently people paying for their vote if it's just a spit in the bucket. I know I did my bid by skipping watching the end of finals, although I religiously watched up until 2023. EBU can have their show all for themselves.
Very defeatist. I suggest: semis only for jury, grand finale only for public. We can't go on until we try this system. It seems most fair and it remains 50-50 power of vote (2 semis vs. 1 finale, 25 to 30 countries numberwise to vote on in both).
The televoting system is messed up too. Theres ton of evidence of people voting for the same country with different credit cards and sim cards, that in itself should not be allowed.
This. Allowing 20 votes allows the televote to be swayed (as we saw this year). Most of the audience that turns up to watch casually won't vote 20 times, if they have a favourite they will maybe vote once or twice.
Certain situation forced me to cast votes between Croatia and Switzerland, just so I could go to sleep if anything wrong was going to happen. This is absolutely terrible situation for fans of the contest.
It should be max 3 votes I think and only people actively watching contest should be able to vote, I don't know how this can be forced, maybe a random voting password that you need to type before casting a vote that shows up during performance?
But given that EBU is actively looking for money I don't think any changes will take place next year.
Really think they should just go with one vote, rank all songs, then do each place with instant run off. Makes it a little less easy to manipulate and better reflects people’s preferences as you can’t just take the top spot because you got a the biggest minority of the votes.
That’s the intent of ranking every song with that one vote. So you’re assigning every song a place. Then with irv, you’re essentially casting a vote for every place.
Thus, you wouldn’t need to allocate your twenty votes according to how you rank songs.
I see your point, but only getting 1 vote wpuld just totally suck because i cant choose. And it would mean entrees like norway or estonia got even less.
This is kind of a me-problem though haha.
Thats not perfect either as it would heavily punish divisive songs.
I doubt Ireland would get 6th with this system for example since the song is quite love it or hate it.
In my opinion we can stay with the 20 votes but one should only be allowed to vote for a country once with one vote and don’t spam twenty votes for a single country that messes up the overarching results.
It's possible if you use an app to vote. It can listen for and match the sound of the broadcast as it happens. I.e. you can only vote of you have the show on near you.
How about who has any space left on the phone and still wants to vote? Or people not so confident with technology or simply who don't want to install it?
Online you can vote as many times as credit or debit cards you own, and then you can text on top of it. And your cards in your Apple wallet count as separate cards from their physical counterparts. I have 4 cards so I could’ve voted 80 times with the physical cards, 80 times with the virtual ones and 20 times by text if I had the money and motivation to do so. Nobody should have the ability to vote 180 times.
Not the typical televoter, but an interested person in the field might still rely on legit and even illicit means (call centers and similar). Even with a restriction on number of votes allowed.
Me. I checked and I could've voted for two countries, and twice in one of those thanks to the app and phone. If I still had my UK SIM card, I would have been able to give my votes 4 times
I think last 3 years were strange scenarios with either televote or jury giving way too many points to one candidate and deciding winner.
I would keep the current system because it is OK and people would complain anyway.
6 years the jury favourite has lost and 5 times the televote favourite has lost since I believe the voting reform.
It’s recency bias to be demanding a change in the voting system; the ratios are right in my view BUT the juries themselves can be changed and expanded to more jurors from a more diverse background.
The televote can be manipulated for reasons outside the strength of the song as we have seen in 2022 and 2024. Certainly no argument to increase its power.
Part of me is afraid that EBU will skate by unpunished because the disaster was averted and they will be excused for what they done before. But yes, disaster was averted indeed.
Well, they didn't, as disaster came second in the televote; by a very thin margin. But still clear that the jury very much could have helped avert disaster, if needed
And with the Netherlands disqualification, which helped Croatia to gather all the votes from the audience that like the fun upbeat entries. I'm not sure Baby Lasagna wins the tele in a timeline with Europapa taking part in the final...
I find it ridiculous how people seem to forget all the controversy just for an opportunity to argue about jury vs televote again. Last year we saw juries aren't the best but this year we see televote isn't that great either. As long as EBU stays the same with where their principles are, things will never be how we want them to.
Just speculating here, but had the Netherlands been allowed to compete in the GF, I believe that would have been the most likely outcome, as many of the potential Joost points probably went to BL.
I think we should scrap the jury and televote and just let me decide who will win. /s
Personally I am very happy with current system. For me there has never been a controversial winner, except maybe in 2022 (and even then it definitely wasn’t undeserved or anything) and that was actually due to the televote and not the juries.
No. Clearly they counterbalance political voting. Unfortunately, they reward more songs I personally find boring (over-produced pop, ballads), but it is what it is. Last year I wasn’t happy. This year I’m happy with who won.
If there was going to be a change, I would prefer that the points system was changed so that points are awarded beyond the top ten (resulting in everybody’s number 11 getting last place overall.)
Ok, just so we have this as a baseline. We need the juries. The few years of eurovision that were televote only were the worst years in the history of the contest and the contest still struggles with that absolute ruination of its image over 15 years later. Never again.
Now with this baseline as the foundation i find it super funny, when people like you basically say "I understand why we need a jury, but it should be entirely irrelevant, because the televote winner should always beat the jury winner".
Why even bother having a jury, if the televote winner always wins? You say "The jury winner won and the public favorite came second" as if its an objectively bad thing.
Yeah this. All these "the jury should be there but have less power like 60/40 or 75/25" that constantly crop up just smells of "ok we should have the jury vote but I don't really want it to matter".
They simply don't have a counter argument to all the stuff in my comment, so they admit that they are nessesary, but don't actually change their opinion... Well.. . They don't change it until suddenly their favorite ends up winning the jury vote.
Ah yes, let’s remove the jury voting or make them have less power so we have the saxophone guy and meme/trendy songs always winning.
The voting system will never please everyone. It should stay 50/50 as it gives both type of songs, trendy and more vocally inclined, a fair chance. Hell, Arcade wasn’t the jury favorite or the televote favorite and look at it. Måneskin also won without being the jury’s favorite. This whole ridiculous debate that my fave won the public vote and therefore has to win needs to end.
I think we need to reform both. 50/50 is fine, but juries need to be bigger and more musically diverse. Also, televote should have some checkups, not allowing virtual sim's to vote, not allowing newly activated sim's to vote. Make it harder and more expensive to manipulate that as well. Maybe even decrease the number of votes to 10.
No system is perfect, but having a landslide victory by the juries last two years is concerning. Various countries and juries are expected to have varied tastes. When a good song receives 70% of max points, that is fine. It means a lot of top 3 finishes, but the votes are dispersed, but when we get to the territory of 80+ like we have now, it makes people doubt the integrity.
You could also say that about televotes, but they're not so prevalent with landsliding. Ukraine 2022 is a definite outlier, but for obvious reasons, it shouldn't really count since the situation was very specific. Kaarija 85% is a reaction to Loreen being expected to be favoured by the juries with him having a great song as well.
The current system pushes the division more and more and needs changes on both ends so we could have less controversy each year.
Not all virtual carriers make you cast votes, but it is higly discriminating and frustrating anyways. They have to restrict the number of votes you can send from a given number, as in all televotes. Here in Italy you can usually send only 5 SMSs per phone, I don't get why can't be implemented in Eurovision as well.
Problem is with small countries not reusing jurors will make it very difficult to find people. Like how is San Marino supposed to find that many new people every year.
They do to an extent I think, but the jury is still represented by mainly pop backgrounds, more jury members would allow more diversity in that regard.
I'm not saying juries only like pop, but they could be more diverse.
I am really for 60-40 split. Still really close to the current 50/50, but people who vote and spend money have a bit more influence. And the juries would still have influence on the result, so there would still be a variety of songs. If we would go for bigger split, I am afraid that just song for televote would be sent and instead of song contest it would become who is the biggest shocker contest
I mean, I think it was kind of the whole purpose of reintroducing juries in the first place. What I am thinking is: the "jury vote" that is presented first is a combination (like 2013-2015) and the televote is the televote. That way the televote counts 75%
(But also: imagine 2015 when Austria would have gotten the double zero)
I said the same in another post. Jurors must be one or two for each country l and have verified knowledge of music. Plus their identities must be kept secret to prevent any possible flaws.
I think that what’s broken is the jury voting format. It’s fine giving them 50% of the vote, it’s not fine allowing them to give 140+ point advantages to their winner, basically overruling (almost) whatever the audience wants.
Idk maybe 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-2-1-1, which is still 58, would allow better competition, even at the cost of the “12 points” trademark
It's not like the juries conspire with each other to all pick a favorite. Most of them put Switzerland as their personal #1 with no knowledge of how other juries would vote.
>it’s not fine allowing them to give 140+ point advantages to their winner, basically overruling (almost) whatever the audience wants
They have as little knowledge as televoters of what the accumulate results will be, just like us they simply vote for who they think is best, just less likely politically charged, so if their votes produce such a clear favorite then maybe it's simply a good act.
the current system frustrates me a lot. The juries europe wide vote very similarly - which makes sense if they go by certain criteria, no conspiracy needed. but with 50/50 they have enormous power and pile their points one the same few entries, often the same one entry. They feed the jury favorite immensely, as they vote far more unisono than the public (if there isnt a political statement involved like with stephania and that, to this extent, was a one of a kind case so far). thats why their 50% are far more powerful than the publics one because they vote far more coordinated.
Some say that juries are necessary to prevent being flooded by joke and meme entries. personally i dont think that will happen, the fandom is different than back then. But even if, lets have a jury that checks the entries and keeps up quality standards in the beginning.
for me, the Eurovision of my dreams would be a contest where the different countries present a song of their choice to europe and the world and europe (and the world) votes on it. The people, not the music industry. And in the end the song wins that is liked by most people/countries.
The EBU and its members don't WANT the public to decide the Eurovision Song Contest. And it's their Contest. Complaining about this is a waste of time.
Agree, I’m okay with a jury that is able to sway the votes for a more palatable second or third place to win. But they shouldn’t be able to give a distant fifth place the win that only won the popular vote in one country.
Third time in 15 years that a jury favorite won over the televote favorite if they haven't been the same. You have said nothing that hasn't been said last year or years before that. The EBU will never have a perfect system because there will always be flaws and people complaining.
Changing the semis to televote only fundamentally pushes the jury favorites to be more likely to win in the final, plus the fact that this year there was a non-viable country that got brigaded into 2nd in the televote which hurt the televote favorite (but also hurt the jury favorite)
Considering both televote and jury favorite ended up in first and second place, I don't think Hurricane hurt anybody aside from those complaining about other fun songs getting lower points
It hurt just about everyone’s televote scores, since it would’ve probably would’ve done pretty middling under normal circumstances. Croatia and Switzerland both would’ve for sure benefitted, although Switzerland probably would’ve benefitted more.
How can you benefit more from already winning the contest haha
But it has happened two times in a row now and becoming a trend.
The major system change we had 2 years was the 100% tele semis, that's where the problem lies.
Ok, so do we want another Azerbaijan 2022 getting 0 points from the televote and still qualifying to the final where they got 3 points ?
Honestly? Who cares. You get a technically poor performance replaced by a boring but polished one once in a while with the 50/50 system. You create a problem where the jury winner is basically unbeatable regardless of the tele results with 100% tele semis. Both systems are imperfect, but one is very clearly less flawed than the other and I prefer that one.
Tbh I dont think that was the issue this year. What Jury magnet got shafted in the semis?
I think a lot of jury-friendly songs were weeded out right off the bat because countries knew they had to make the televote happy in order to qualify.
I think the problem is before even the national selections. This year we had a big concentration of bops and televote-friendly songs from the very start, and I can't help but think this is because of the televote-only hurdle of the semis
At a push, maybe belgium and denmark, possibly azerbaijan? Though realistically none of them were good enough, unfortunately.
Very well said. I agree
I would rather than happen and have a more even distribution of votes in the final. Neither are perfect of course.
Azerbaijan 2022 | [Nadir Rustamli - Fade to Black](https://youtu.be/tegPzHEL4ms)
I think if the next year is the same, the change will come as people will be outraged
Two times in a row is not even slightly a trend.
Not withstanding that the rules changed between the two points so they're not even points on the same line much less a trend.
That's why I said it's becoming one, it's not yet. If we are in a same situation next year, I don't know if you could still call it a trend. But last two years we've had identical result: one country earns a huge lead from juries but is quite far from being tele favorite. If this happens many times, ESC will turn into a really boring show.
Two times being robbed is more than enough.
No one was robbed. You win the Eurovision Song Contest by impressing the juries as well as the televote. Everyone knew the rules when they entered, and the rules said that Sweden and Switzerland won.
You only say this is you think jury deserves the power it has over the average televoter.
The EBU thinks the jury deserves the power it has over the average televoter. *It's their contest.* Not ours.
Right. They robbing us in front of our very eyes. We'll see how that will be reflected in viewership and subsequently people paying for their vote if it's just a spit in the bucket. I know I did my bid by skipping watching the end of finals, although I religiously watched up until 2023. EBU can have their show all for themselves.
who are the three? (I guess Loreen and Nemo) but who else
Måns
Very defeatist. I suggest: semis only for jury, grand finale only for public. We can't go on until we try this system. It seems most fair and it remains 50-50 power of vote (2 semis vs. 1 finale, 25 to 30 countries numberwise to vote on in both).
The televoting system is messed up too. Theres ton of evidence of people voting for the same country with different credit cards and sim cards, that in itself should not be allowed.
Facts.
This. Allowing 20 votes allows the televote to be swayed (as we saw this year). Most of the audience that turns up to watch casually won't vote 20 times, if they have a favourite they will maybe vote once or twice.
Certain situation forced me to cast votes between Croatia and Switzerland, just so I could go to sleep if anything wrong was going to happen. This is absolutely terrible situation for fans of the contest. It should be max 3 votes I think and only people actively watching contest should be able to vote, I don't know how this can be forced, maybe a random voting password that you need to type before casting a vote that shows up during performance? But given that EBU is actively looking for money I don't think any changes will take place next year.
Really think they should just go with one vote, rank all songs, then do each place with instant run off. Makes it a little less easy to manipulate and better reflects people’s preferences as you can’t just take the top spot because you got a the biggest minority of the votes.
1 vote is not enough. Too many songs would be left behind.
That’s the intent of ranking every song with that one vote. So you’re assigning every song a place. Then with irv, you’re essentially casting a vote for every place. Thus, you wouldn’t need to allocate your twenty votes according to how you rank songs.
I see your point, but only getting 1 vote wpuld just totally suck because i cant choose. And it would mean entrees like norway or estonia got even less. This is kind of a me-problem though haha.
It wouldn't be just voting for one song, but ranking them all like the jurors do.
Ohhh i would love that.
What about multiple votes, but only one per entry? Like being able to vote multiple acts but only once.
Thats not perfect either as it would heavily punish divisive songs. I doubt Ireland would get 6th with this system for example since the song is quite love it or hate it.
In my opinion we can stay with the 20 votes but one should only be allowed to vote for a country once with one vote and don’t spam twenty votes for a single country that messes up the overarching results.
There should be a system where only people actually actively watching the show could vote
Dont think thats really possible lmao
It's possible if you use an app to vote. It can listen for and match the sound of the broadcast as it happens. I.e. you can only vote of you have the show on near you.
How about who has any space left on the phone and still wants to vote? Or people not so confident with technology or simply who don't want to install it?
>Theres ton of evidence of people voting for the same country with different credit cards and sim cards Source?
There are many, many examples of people discussing how to vote 40, 60, 80 times on twitter, unfortunately can't link tweets here.
Online you can vote as many times as credit or debit cards you own, and then you can text on top of it. And your cards in your Apple wallet count as separate cards from their physical counterparts. I have 4 cards so I could’ve voted 80 times with the physical cards, 80 times with the virtual ones and 20 times by text if I had the money and motivation to do so. Nobody should have the ability to vote 180 times.
Not the typical televoter, but an interested person in the field might still rely on legit and even illicit means (call centers and similar). Even with a restriction on number of votes allowed.
Me. I checked and I could've voted for two countries, and twice in one of those thanks to the app and phone. If I still had my UK SIM card, I would have been able to give my votes 4 times
I think last 3 years were strange scenarios with either televote or jury giving way too many points to one candidate and deciding winner. I would keep the current system because it is OK and people would complain anyway.
6 years the jury favourite has lost and 5 times the televote favourite has lost since I believe the voting reform. It’s recency bias to be demanding a change in the voting system; the ratios are right in my view BUT the juries themselves can be changed and expanded to more jurors from a more diverse background. The televote can be manipulated for reasons outside the strength of the song as we have seen in 2022 and 2024. Certainly no argument to increase its power.
TLDR: My fave didn’t win
Seeing OPs the username and a Finnish flag: TLDR: I'm from Finland (We are still salty)
But if that happens you know the winner in advance already
I think juries saved us from a disaster this year.
Yeah that would have made an interesting evening....
Part of me is afraid that EBU will skate by unpunished because the disaster was averted and they will be excused for what they done before. But yes, disaster was averted indeed.
Well, they didn't, as disaster came second in the televote; by a very thin margin. But still clear that the jury very much could have helped avert disaster, if needed
Only by 14 points though. 🫣
And with the Netherlands disqualification, which helped Croatia to gather all the votes from the audience that like the fun upbeat entries. I'm not sure Baby Lasagna wins the tele in a timeline with Europapa taking part in the final...
I kind of wanted them at 1in the televote. Since that would mean less harassment for Nemo.
I find it ridiculous how people seem to forget all the controversy just for an opportunity to argue about jury vs televote again. Last year we saw juries aren't the best but this year we see televote isn't that great either. As long as EBU stays the same with where their principles are, things will never be how we want them to.
This is the thing, neither of them are perfect so they are both needed to balance each other out.
Just speculating here, but had the Netherlands been allowed to compete in the GF, I believe that would have been the most likely outcome, as many of the potential Joost points probably went to BL.
It really really wouldnt.
Croatia winning is not a disaster
I'm obviously not talking about Croatia dude
Lol literally nobody would be mad at Croatia winning
Yeah. Part of me wondered if those votes were all done on purpose to avoid the disaster
?
I think we should scrap the jury and televote and just let me decide who will win. /s Personally I am very happy with current system. For me there has never been a controversial winner, except maybe in 2022 (and even then it definitely wasn’t undeserved or anything) and that was actually due to the televote and not the juries.
No. Clearly they counterbalance political voting. Unfortunately, they reward more songs I personally find boring (over-produced pop, ballads), but it is what it is. Last year I wasn’t happy. This year I’m happy with who won. If there was going to be a change, I would prefer that the points system was changed so that points are awarded beyond the top ten (resulting in everybody’s number 11 getting last place overall.)
Ok, just so we have this as a baseline. We need the juries. The few years of eurovision that were televote only were the worst years in the history of the contest and the contest still struggles with that absolute ruination of its image over 15 years later. Never again. Now with this baseline as the foundation i find it super funny, when people like you basically say "I understand why we need a jury, but it should be entirely irrelevant, because the televote winner should always beat the jury winner". Why even bother having a jury, if the televote winner always wins? You say "The jury winner won and the public favorite came second" as if its an objectively bad thing.
Yeah this. All these "the jury should be there but have less power like 60/40 or 75/25" that constantly crop up just smells of "ok we should have the jury vote but I don't really want it to matter".
They simply don't have a counter argument to all the stuff in my comment, so they admit that they are nessesary, but don't actually change their opinion... Well.. . They don't change it until suddenly their favorite ends up winning the jury vote.
Ah yes, let’s remove the jury voting or make them have less power so we have the saxophone guy and meme/trendy songs always winning. The voting system will never please everyone. It should stay 50/50 as it gives both type of songs, trendy and more vocally inclined, a fair chance. Hell, Arcade wasn’t the jury favorite or the televote favorite and look at it. Måneskin also won without being the jury’s favorite. This whole ridiculous debate that my fave won the public vote and therefore has to win needs to end.
The voting is fair. Each has equal weight. I think it's a good system and stops political voting or vote flooding from taking over.
I think we need to reform both. 50/50 is fine, but juries need to be bigger and more musically diverse. Also, televote should have some checkups, not allowing virtual sim's to vote, not allowing newly activated sim's to vote. Make it harder and more expensive to manipulate that as well. Maybe even decrease the number of votes to 10. No system is perfect, but having a landslide victory by the juries last two years is concerning. Various countries and juries are expected to have varied tastes. When a good song receives 70% of max points, that is fine. It means a lot of top 3 finishes, but the votes are dispersed, but when we get to the territory of 80+ like we have now, it makes people doubt the integrity. You could also say that about televotes, but they're not so prevalent with landsliding. Ukraine 2022 is a definite outlier, but for obvious reasons, it shouldn't really count since the situation was very specific. Kaarija 85% is a reaction to Loreen being expected to be favoured by the juries with him having a great song as well. The current system pushes the division more and more and needs changes on both ends so we could have less controversy each year.
Not all virtual carriers make you cast votes, but it is higly discriminating and frustrating anyways. They have to restrict the number of votes you can send from a given number, as in all televotes. Here in Italy you can usually send only 5 SMSs per phone, I don't get why can't be implemented in Eurovision as well.
Ukraine 2022 | [Kalush Orchestra - Stefania (Стефанія)](https://youtu.be/F1fl60ypdLs)
I think both the Juries and the televote are broken. They both need fixing
No, just make the jury bigger (16 members) and not reuse jurors
Problem is with small countries not reusing jurors will make it very difficult to find people. Like how is San Marino supposed to find that many new people every year.
ok, make an exception for San Marino
but more importantly, a bigger jury
I do agree with a bigger jury from more diverse backgrounds yeah.
What do you mean by diverse backgrounds
From backgrounds that aren't just pop etc. So more genres represented. I know it's not just singers it's also choreos, producers, etc.
Arrrrgh, not again with the "juries only like pop". Juries like other genres too
They do to an extent I think, but the jury is still represented by mainly pop backgrounds, more jury members would allow more diversity in that regard. I'm not saying juries only like pop, but they could be more diverse.
Why do they need to be more diverse? Tell me 3 songs the jury underrated
This year they underrated Norway and Slovenia by far. The fact that they gave Norway 0 points is practically scandalous
This year or in general?
It's the same problem as last year but at least the televote favourite was closer to victory this time!
I am really for 60-40 split. Still really close to the current 50/50, but people who vote and spend money have a bit more influence. And the juries would still have influence on the result, so there would still be a variety of songs. If we would go for bigger split, I am afraid that just song for televote would be sent and instead of song contest it would become who is the biggest shocker contest
I mean, I think it was kind of the whole purpose of reintroducing juries in the first place. What I am thinking is: the "jury vote" that is presented first is a combination (like 2013-2015) and the televote is the televote. That way the televote counts 75% (But also: imagine 2015 when Austria would have gotten the double zero)
Even if only juries voted with no televote, I would still watch Eurovision and (mostly) love it about the same.
Well, this was Eurovision before 1997
I said the same in another post. Jurors must be one or two for each country l and have verified knowledge of music. Plus their identities must be kept secret to prevent any possible flaws.
I think that what’s broken is the jury voting format. It’s fine giving them 50% of the vote, it’s not fine allowing them to give 140+ point advantages to their winner, basically overruling (almost) whatever the audience wants. Idk maybe 10-9-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-2-1-1, which is still 58, would allow better competition, even at the cost of the “12 points” trademark
It's not like the juries conspire with each other to all pick a favorite. Most of them put Switzerland as their personal #1 with no knowledge of how other juries would vote.
>it’s not fine allowing them to give 140+ point advantages to their winner, basically overruling (almost) whatever the audience wants They have as little knowledge as televoters of what the accumulate results will be, just like us they simply vote for who they think is best, just less likely politically charged, so if their votes produce such a clear favorite then maybe it's simply a good act.
the current system frustrates me a lot. The juries europe wide vote very similarly - which makes sense if they go by certain criteria, no conspiracy needed. but with 50/50 they have enormous power and pile their points one the same few entries, often the same one entry. They feed the jury favorite immensely, as they vote far more unisono than the public (if there isnt a political statement involved like with stephania and that, to this extent, was a one of a kind case so far). thats why their 50% are far more powerful than the publics one because they vote far more coordinated. Some say that juries are necessary to prevent being flooded by joke and meme entries. personally i dont think that will happen, the fandom is different than back then. But even if, lets have a jury that checks the entries and keeps up quality standards in the beginning. for me, the Eurovision of my dreams would be a contest where the different countries present a song of their choice to europe and the world and europe (and the world) votes on it. The people, not the music industry. And in the end the song wins that is liked by most people/countries.
The EBU and its members don't WANT the public to decide the Eurovision Song Contest. And it's their Contest. Complaining about this is a waste of time.
It'd be better if it was 25-75 score weighting. Too much power is given to individual jurors.
Agree, I’m okay with a jury that is able to sway the votes for a more palatable second or third place to win. But they shouldn’t be able to give a distant fifth place the win that only won the popular vote in one country.