So, after the excitement of 2022 and 2023 – followed by the unprecedented fiasco that was Malmo – it was back to a relative degree of normality, as the Eurovision community relocated to Basel – Switzerland’s third city – for the 69th contest.
I’ll begin by expressing my thoughts on the new format for announcing the qualifiers from the semi-finals. In my opinion, what was a very simple system before, has now been made unnecessarily complicated. It failed to add any particular suspense, as they claimed it would.
Showing three nations at a time meant that you would know before being announced that one of those three would be progressing; a seemingly pointless move, which if anything actually removes suspense. And to make themselves look even more unprofessional, when announcing the final one of the ten qualifiers each night, they just showed the presenters, rather than a split-screen of the 6/7 remaining nations, as most would have expected.
The one improvement I will commend them for – even if only noticeable to perennial viewers – was that they played a brief clip of each song after it qualified, whilst showing the acts celebrating. It’ll be interesting to see if they will keep this system in place next year – if not, it’d seem like a step backwards, but in all honesty, it added little value. This being said, I think listing the remaining nations before announcing the tenth and final qualifier – with a split-screen this time – would be worth keeping.
And now onto the winner, and in my opinion, a very worthy winner; JJ from Austria. Operatic heights that even a seasoned falsetto singer like myself could only dream of hitting, bags of raw emotion that Duncan and Gjon’s Tears would have been proud of, and both music and visuals that would mesmerise even the most emotionless of individuals.
Some fans, including Graham Norton, felt that it may not be able to win due to the similarity with Nemo, but in all honesty, the techno element was only seen in the final few bars. This aside, the similarities were more with the afore-mentioned Gjon and Duncan, along with Elina Nechayeva (Estonia, 2018).
This being said, it won’t be one of the most remembered winners, and it seems unlikely he will go on to achieve Sam Ryder and Maneskin levels of international stardom. Nonetheless, I wish him well with his career, which I’m sure is only just beginning in earnest.
This was, perhaps, reflected in the scores. JJ’s combined total of 436 points was a record low under the double-points voting system in place since 2016 – it was also the first time that only one nation crossed the 400-point barrier, and the first time in five contests that nobody scored more than 300 with either juries or public, or 500 overall.
An unmemorable year for entries with no obvious winner? Perhaps. As Graham Norton pointed out; “You’re only hearing 26 songs tonight – 11 have already been eliminated. So, if you don’t enjoy tonight’s show, just remember; there were worse”.
But whereas a year ago, I was struggling to find ten songs to justify giving my points to, this time there were several that were unfortunate to have missed out. Conversely, I also struggled to work out my least favourite song – as there were none that I especially disliked this year (I eventually went for Czechia, although Greece and Serbia were hot on their heels). Even none of them were particularly awful – they just didn’t do much for me. But this is only based on my personal preferences.
Most frustratingly, for Kaarija and Baby Lasagna – who combined expertly to fuse their songs together on stage to justifiably rapturous applause – either of them know their respective songs could have won if they had waited until this year (as could Sam Ryder). I’d be inclined to say they were the “real winners” this year, but once again, they’ll have to be content with second place – as that honour goes to the vintage “Made in Switzerland” song – arguably up there with classics such as “Love love, peace peace”. The classic Swiss products, along with subtle Eurovision references that only a seasoned fan would get, were a stroke of genius.
At the other end, the usual polarisation was decidedly lesser than in previous years – last-placed San Marino scored 27 points – and with a gap between first and last of only 409 points, it was the smallest gap since the 2016 introduction of the double-points system we know and love today. This meant the table was more congested than usual. Nevertheless, one familiar sentence was uttered. And we all know what that is – that all-too-familiar elephant. Yes, people, I’m talking about: “United Kingdom, the public have given you… zero points”.
This should, of course, in no way be a reflection of the all-female trio. Their vocals left little to be desired, the staging was as competitive as many other nations, leaving yet another zero from the millions of potential voters as a bitter taste in the mouths for many Britons.
So, what went wrong? Well, firstly, it would be unfair to say it was a disastrous night for the UK. A top 10 finish with the juries was well-deserved in my opinion (which is completely unbiased, obviously) and 88 points is almost double the score achieved by Olly a year ago. 19th overall is one place lower, but with one more country in the final this year, it was the same distance above last place. They also scored the UK’s third-highest post-2016 jury score. But once again, it all fell apart when the public vote came in. It appears to be to the UK at Eurovision what penalty shoot-outs are to the England football team (that’s as much as I’m prepared to talk about that).
The question now is, will this successive public zero act as a wake-up call for the BBC the way that Sam Ryder did? It’s not quite the same level of crisis or ignominy, but let’s not kid ourselves into thinking that the revolution many predicted post-Turin has materialised. Mae Muller’s capitulation has been followed by two mediocre finishes, albeit with a mixture of positives and negatives to be taken from each.
Firstly, there will be the same inevitable cries of “why do I waste my licence money on this nonsense?” – and whilst I’m hardly a supporter or advocate of the licence myself, there’s no likelihood of the UK withdrawing, just as there wasn’t after all the other unimpressive results since the heady days of Bucks Fizz and Katrina.
For those of you reading outside of the UK, who aren’t familiar with our laws, you have to pay almost £175 a year for a licence to own a television. In your own home. Essentially, it’s a BBC tax, as all the other stations gain their revenue from advertising, unlike the BBC. Sounds a bit Orwellian, right? But don’t expect our dear leader Keir Starmer to change it anytime soon. Anyway, that’s enough political junk…
There will also be cries from some about the possibility of a return to a National Final (most recently known as You Decide in 2019). In all honesty, whilst 2016-19 under this format brought the UK no zeroes, it also brought no top half finishes – Lucie Jones narrowly missing out on a half-century of jury points and a top half finish being the closest thing to a significant achievement.
So, let’s look at the reasons and factors as to why the UK found themselves in familiar, unwelcome territory yet again. Firstly, whilst not wishing to parrot the sentiments of the “it’s all political and Europe hates us” brigade, it’d be frivolous to deny that there is a pattern here.
After whiling away a standard, uneventful post-contest Monday evening; researching, listing and then calculating the UK’s post-2016 scores (before you say I need to get out more, I was actually in a pub at the time, I’ll have you know), a number of statistics were brought to my attention – none of which were particularly surprising, although some staggering nonetheless.
With the juries, the UK’s average combined points total is only 68 – and that’s before you remove Sam Ryder from the equation – without him, it drops by almost half, to only 37. Now, with the televoters – we’ll remove Sam’s unusually high score once again (for this paragraph at least); the combined total is a mere 57 points. The average score is even more shocking; just under 6 and a half points. 72% of all points post-2016 – that’s over two thirds – have been from the juries.
Putting Mr. Ryder back in for the moment; the combined post-2016 points total is 856 – scoring 283 from the juries and exactly 100 fewer from the public, he accounts for 43% of the UK’s jury points, and a staggering 76% of televote points. Minus both sets of Sam’s points, juries account for an over-whelming 83% of the UK’s post-2016 points. Overall, Spaceman counts for 54% – over half – of the UK’s points.
Only SuRie in 2018 scored a marginally better score with the public than with the juries, and most would probably be inclined to believe that had more to do with her stoic handling of a certain “freedom-demanding” individual.
Finally, if you’ve not had enough already, or are of a somewhat nervous disposition, then I would advise you not to read any more of this paragraph. The average public points – even including Spaceman – is a mere 30. Take the super-space-man out, and – brace yourselves – the average is just 7. Individually, only three entries have entered double-figures. Perhaps most frighteningly, televote points that were not for Mr. Ryder account for only 7% of all their post-2016 points.
These stats make for grim reading, no doubt. But is all hope lost? Absolutely not. Enough of the boring and depressing statistics. More importantly, what can the UK do to change this barren run of public votes?
The reasons for Super-Sam’s magnanimous success in 2022 were obvious – catchy song, phenomenal vocals, flashy staging and outfit, with a personality you couldn’t help but love. In short, he had everything. His passion, performance and energy connected with people across the world-both in the jury room and at home, and united both rock and pop lovers in a way no British contestant has managed post-Katrina.
By comparison, it has to be said that the songs by James Newman (how has he only just got a mention?!), Olly Alexander and Remember Monday were distinctly unmemorable. Likeable at best, which is the problem. If everyone just likes it, they won’t vote for it. They’ll vote for a song they LOVE.
I remember personally writing to the BBC out of the embers of 2021 (no pun intended, well maybe) – suggesting a particular singer who I know personally, that I believed (and still do) would guarantee a respectable result, even if perhaps not a victory. Thankfully they knew something (or someone, as it were), that I didn’t, and the rest is history.
I won’t name this person, except to say that she (that narrows it down by half) lives in my hometown and was a former Voice contestant (that probably narrows it down even more; just go on Google). In all seriousness, given how this combination has provided high scores and results for many in recent years, a singer of either biological sex with a power-pop-ballad with extensive experience of performing infront of a large global audience, would hardly go amiss. At the very least, it certainly wouldn’t be yet another zero.
Going back to why the UK’s public results tend to be so low, for the moment. It would be remiss not to look at some of the possible factors that might explain this pattern. Many of which were analysed in a previous article, where I looked at what other factors may be at play in why certain nations tend to fare better than others – particularly when it comes to the public vote.
There appears to be a perennial East-West divide; with Ukraine being the most obvious example of this. Shooting up in the public vote with all of their last six entries, the common misconception is that sympathy votes are the obvious factor here. And whilst, when it came to the Kalush Orchestra at least, they may be more accurate, this is, infact, not the main factor – it is moreover to do with the sizeable diaspora of Ukrainians across the continent. We saw similar fortunes for Albania and Poland this year. Lithuania and Armenia often benefit similarly.
This year was a classic example, infact – they actually had my favourite song in the final (overall was Slovenia) – which has never happened before (I’m just a stickler for bands, being a 90’s BritPop kid, mad for it, know what I mean, like?) but even I’ll admit it would have struggled to make the final if it’d been Georgia or Montenegro’s entry, for example.
Western nations, by comparison, have vastly less a tradition of relocating eastwards. There are obvious socio-economic factors involved here, but we’re not discussing them. Malta’s capitulation in the public vote – scoring only 8 points in comparison to the 83 they received from the public – was a fate that Ira and Destiny found to their peril – despite all being among the pre-contest favourites.
Although in their case, it didn’t help with the whole fiasco of not being able to sing “that word” during the final (search for her MESC performance on YouTube if you’re not aware of the back-story). Needless to say, if you know what I’m referring to, the audience inside the arena did sing it (I wasn’t there this year, but have it on good authority).
The big 5 (and the hosts) have historically suffered due to their entries not being performed in the semi-finals – not having the same practice and exposure as the other entries appears to have held them back, but this has changed since last year, in which the rules were changed so that the pre-qualified nations perform in the semi-finals. As a result, both of the last two years saw a non-automatic qualifier finish above last place for the first time since 2013 – Melody for Spain being the lowest, finishing 24th.
If we look at the nations who consistently score lower in the televote than their song may have you expect, fortunes tend to be particularly less favourable toward Malta and the UK, as previously explained, but Germany, Portugal, Spain, Sweden and the Netherlands are all examples of nations who also often fall short. Limited diasporas are a contributing factor, but equally it would be frivolous to suggest that the song itself never has any relevance.
Let’s be realistic here – the East-West divide is emphasised in the style of song. East Europeans – if not voting for their country of origin or heritage from abroad – are likely to appreciate a style of pop music more familiar to them. East European pop music is generally darker and more traditional to their culture.
West European pop music, by contrast, tends to be more sugary-sweet. Just me who is noticing the parallels with our respective types of chocolate? I do indulge myself with the sugary delights of the Eastern-European stores here in Weston-super-Mare now and again, but I generally prefer the chocolate I’m used to – such as Cadbury’s and Nestlé – further emphasising my point.
So, in summary, whilst the UK (and certain other nations) can’t be blamed entirely for their consistently lower than deserved televote scores, there is no doubt some room for improvement – lying squarely with the BBC and their willingness (or lack thereof) to choose a better all-rounder.
The proof is there; they’ve done it before and could quite easily do it again, but having hosted so recently, is there a reluctance to try too hard, with all the obvious costs involved? Understandable, perhaps, but it’s worth mentioning that over £50million was generated for the Merseyside area, and in a notoriously working-class area with high rates of poverty, any of the other six shortlisted cities (and maybe some others) would be ready and willing to reap similar rewards.
Having waffled on about my own country’s sorrows for the last God-knows-how-long, perhaps now I should focus on the other elephant in the room – also making another unwanted appearance from last year. Yes, that is of course, the Israeli televote situation.
Since I began writing this article, several national broadcasters have submitted inquiries or complaints to the EBU (13 at the time of writing, I believe) into how Israel scored such a surprisingly high televote score once again. But more on that later.
There are numerous possible explanations. I will start by saying that, whilst I will not be expressing any specific opinion, or taking either side, I find the whole situation in Gaza – like most people with a beating heart, I suspect – to be deeply upsetting. And I think we can all agree that both Eden and Yuval’s songs were beautiful ballads – sung and staged with an appealing “less is more” type simplicity – even if with some controversial overtones, leading some people to question the intentions of KAN (Israel’s national broadcaster) to try and gain sympathy votes.
This being said, both of their comparable televote scores seem unusual; considering they were both the type of songs that generally perform much better with juries – who, strangely, seemed much more indifferent about them – both being placed firmly in midtable mediocrity. Perhaps subconsciously concerned for the possibility of what a victory would have entailed?
Yuval, it needs to be stated, if you aren’t already aware, was present at the Nova Music Festival atrocity on 07/10/23 – thankfully she survived – although she did sustain some shrapnel injuries, but with this in mind, and with no obvious televote winner this year, it may have gained her some points from the public in the same way that the Kalush Orchestra did (though obviously this time, there was a vastly different outcome). Again, I’m not expressing an opinion, just trying to gauge voter feelings.
Last year, Eden Golan was denied the televote victory by only 14 points. Many people would have been aware that the song’s original lyrics had to be changed (twice!) before the EBU would allow the song to compete. Along with Jerry & Alyona and Baby Lasagna, they became the first trio in contest history to score over 300 points in a single set of votes; this may have made Eden’s success slightly less noticeable. Yuval, by comparison, scored 26 points fewer, narrowly missing out on the 300-point mark.
Another possible factor is that both Eden and Yuval’s results coincide with the introduction of the televote being opened from the beginning of the show (not a decision I personally support, but presumably with the intention of levelling the playing field by giving songs performed earlier – which tend to get forgotten, as some people don’t tune in at all until later on in the evening – a better chance of succeeding).
If that is the desired result, then the evidence suggests it is working. 2024 had seen four of the first nine songs performed in the final make the top 10 for the first time in just over 40 years (both with the public and overall), and for the first time under the post-2016 voting system (every year since then had seen only three). Perhaps more significantly, this year also saw two of the first five songs performed on the night make the top 3 for the first time in exactly 20 years.
The main issue that the previously-mentioned inquiring nations appear to have, is the amount of money alleged to have been spent by the Israeli government’s marketing agency on promoting their entry. Similar allegations were made a year ago, but no further action was forthcoming (the contest’s principal sponsor, Moroccan Oil, is an Israeli company, despite what the name suggests, but I’m sure that’s merely a co-incidence).
Whilst, under current rules at least, they may not have done anything unacceptable, there is talk of spending limits – with a possibility of specific rules being drawn up, which at the moment, remain to be seen exactly if and/or what they will be – as they did in creating a new Code of Conduct to ensure the safety and well-being of participants, and to avoid a repeat of Joost’s lamentable situation last year.
Rule breaches or legality aside, whilst nations advertising or canvassing for votes across the continent (or the world, as of 2023) is hardly unheard of, most will probably agree that spending excessive amounts of money, or advertising in any manner or locations that are deemed to be a “Government over-reach”, as it were, is unsporting to say the least, and undoubtedly against the spirit of fair play on which the contest was founded.
Fellow Eurovision enthusiast, ESC Gabe – who was very helpful in my post-Malmo analysis last year (if you’re reading this, thankyou once again) – pointed out in a recent video that he believes a limit on how many times you can vote would be a good idea. On this, I have to agree with him. I believe there does need to be a limit on how many times you can vote, and particularly for any one country. I’ll leave it up to you to decide how many that should be, as I’m undecided on the precise number.
He also suggested that perhaps televoting should be scrapped altogether. Here, I disagree; some fans will forget to download the app until the last minute, or may not know how to download it – not all of us are techno-savvy and it’s important that everyone who wants to vote is able to. Though he did point out the list of countries whose public gave Israel their 12 points – and the similarities to last year were striking, to say the least.
An Israeli victory – a grim possibility as the public votes were being added (Graham Norton claiming after Switzerland’s zero that he thought it was over) – with JJ’s necessary total of exactly 100 minimum far from guaranteed – would have caused all kinds of problems, for both the organisers and community, of Eurovision.
That being said, could it have proved a catalyst for change? Strange as it sounds, the likelihood is that, as the EBU did when quickly and inevitably deciding that Ukraine would not be a suitable host in 2023, that the contest would need to be held elsewhere. This would almost certainly lead to a situation where Israel throw a hissy fit and withdraw, along with Moroccan Oil as the principal sponsor.
So, could it be in the contest’s best interest, both in the short- and long-term, if Israel’s next victory proves to be perilously closer than many would hope to think? Time will tell, no doubt. One thing that is for certain, however – as Israeli song-writer Keren Peles had a significant hand in penning both of their last two entries, it might be an idea to ask her to send something the UK could use? She clearly knows a thing or two about how to appeal to the general population of Europe (and the rest of the world).
Onwards and upwards, to Austria next year. Prior to Conchita’s 2014 success, no previously winning nation had been waiting longer for their next victory. Now, they celebrate their third, just as neighbouring Switzerland did a year ago.
Dates of May 19th, 21st and 23rd at the Stadthalle in Vienna would mean that the 60th and 70th anniversaries of the contest would have both been held on the same dates in the same venue. The week before seems more likely at the moment, and numerous other cities have thrown their hats into the ring – Graz and Innsbruck both have sizeable venues, although Salzburg, the second city, has opted out of submitting a bid. I’m sure you’ll understand, I have to mention several cities, or else I could be “doing a Netta” (if you know, you know).
Though, realistically, despite the absence of capital cities hosting in recent years (Lisbon in 2018 was the last), Vienna remains the obvious favourite once again. It means nothing to me, though. Ohhhhh….
Anyway, what do you think? Did you enjoy this year’s contest? Anything you’d like to add, or disagree with? Or any other specific thoughts or comments? Please let me know, and if you aren’t already liking and following my page (why the hell not?!), it’d be great if you did. Thanks for reading, and I’ll see you in the next article. Ciao for now, Eurofans!
