The Eurovision Song Contest has been an annual "must see" TV event in many homes forever, mainly because of Terry Wogan's droll commentary and the sheer awfulness of many of the acts. However, the political intrigue in the voting has escalated in recent years, so much so that it doesn't matter how good or bad your song or performer really is because you can win simply by friendly neighbouring countries giving it high marks!
Since the Iraq war we have been abysmal, not in the song or the act, just in the marks received. We don't have any friendly neighbouring countries to give us points, not like The Balkan states who have loads of little former Eastern Bloc neighbours to rely on. So knowing what a complete sham the competition is shouldn't we just give up competing in it and boycott the event? After all it's our TV licence money being used, and apart from ABBA I can't think of any performer who has gone on to dominate the music industry since appearing in the competition, so why bother*?
*Cliff Richard, Clodah Rogers, Lulu and Sandy Shaw were already established acts before they did Eurovision and none of them have achieved ABBA's global success!
I'm not sure Iraq played a factor as both strong anti-war countries Germany and France were near the bottom if memory serves. The voting has become geographical with the Baltics, Scandanavian's etc exchanging points and Terry is right to have a good chuckle at the farce of it all.
Our song was pretty dreadful too.
Well the UK one was on the mediocrity side of average, but there were many others far worse I think. Germany and France have always had even fewer friends than us anyway.Originally posted by DB7@May 26 2005, 10:58 AM
I'm not sure Iraq played a factor as both strong anti-war countries Germany and France were near the bottom if memory serves. The voting has become geographical with the Baltics, Scandanavian's etc exchanging points and Terry is right to have a good chuckle at the farce of it all.
Our song was pretty dreadful too.
This is real talent, see the attached karaoke for the deaf!Originally posted by samkydd@May 26 2005, 11:21 AM
Well the UK one was on the mediocrity side of average, but there were many others far worse I think. Germany and France have always had even fewer friends than us anyway.
Our tv licence money is being spent on output licence fee payers can't access unless they buy a 'free' (ha!) view box...but it appears nobody gives a money's about that.
Eurovision this year had some of the worst songs I can remember, and I've been watching it since the late 1970s. Malta's was alright though, and it's a shame they didn't win.
I've had a long old rant about Freeview before. I can't remember what topic it was under now but I totally agree that providing channels for people on the basis that they have to go and buy another bit of kit is totally wrong, and the government should have stepped in and put a stop to it! The BBC should have done the Freeview channels as a commercial channel would, self financing from revenue through advertising. They drive us nuts with self-advertising of their own programmes and campaigns, charities etc so its not much different from annoying us with commercial adverts! But we all know that the BBC are experts at spending money but not so good at bringing any in!Originally posted by David Challinor@May 26 2005, 12:59 PM
Our tv licence money is being spent on output licence fee payers can't access unless they buy a 'free' (ha!) view box...but it appears nobody gives a money's about that.
Eurovision this year had some of the worst songs I can remember, and I've been watching it since the late 1970s. Malta's was alright though, and it's a shame they didn't win.
Anyway, on the subject of Eurovision, how long have Israel been in Europe? Or Malta, or Russia!
Taken from the Times May 24th
How song contest defeat clouds Dutch euro-visionBy Anthony Browne
Europe Correspondent
ESTABLISHED half a century ago to bring the people of Europe together through music, the Eurovision Song Contest now seems set to blow the European project apart.
The rejection of the Dutch entrant from this year's contest by a coalition of Eastern European states has intensified opposition to the European constitution in the Netherlands ten days before the country holds a referendum. Pollsters say that it is now all but certain that the Dutch people will re-ject the constitutional treaty in the vote on June 1.
Three opinion polls indicated a huge advance in the "no" vote, which now outnumbers the "yes" vote by as much as two to one. Although EU leaders have shown most concern about France, whose referendum on Sunday is too close to call, rejection of the treaty by the Netherlands, an EU founding member, could also kill off the treaty.
Opposition to the constitution has hardened after Glennis Grace, the Dutch Eurovision contender, was eliminated from the semi-final of the Eurovision contest, apparently defeated by an alliance of Eastern European countries, according to Dutch media.
De Telegraaf devoted its front page to the reaction of readers. "The elimination of the Netherlands shows again who will have the largest say in Europe in the future," one reader said. The newspaper said that many compatriots reacted by using the occasion of the contest "to speak out against European unification and the future the EU constitution".
The Dutch rejection from the contest has touched a raw nerve in a small country worried about being swallowed up in an ever-enlarging European Union.
Maurice de Hond, the country's top pollster, found that 71 per cent of people "think that the fact that substantially more Eastern European than Western European countries have reached the final [of Eurovision] is an example of how the power within the EU has shifted to the east."
He said: "People feel it is confirmation of the feeling they are losing power in the EU and that Eastern Europe is working together against Western Europe."
Jan Peter Balkenende, the Prime Minister, who was put on the defensive in a television interview about the EU constitution, insisted: "The race is far from over. I'm putting my money on the 'yes' vote."
Dutch ministers issued ever more apocalyptic warnings in voters of what will happen if they reject the constitution
Ben Bot, the Foreign Minister, said that it would be disastrous for the economy. Piet Hein Donnter, the Justice Minister, gave warning of "Balkanisation". referring to the civil wars in the former Yugoslavia.
Mr Balkenende recalled the Holocaust and the Second World War, saying that the constitution was the way to peace and preserving civilisation.
"Yes" campaigners were forced to withdraw a television commercial that showed historical footage of Jews being deported in trains during the Holocaust and rooms full of coffins from the Srebrenica massacre in former Yugoslavia, after complaints from viewers. Campaigners argued that the commercial reinforced their view that the constitution was needed to prevent war and terror.
Regarding Freeview, Here in the Isle of Man and am sure in other places we pay the full licence fee yet reception is poor and we cannot get freeview Digital tv except via SKY which is a complete no no for me.
Freddy
Far from wishing to put a stop to it, the Government has been extremely keen on the Freeview project, as the BBC pretty much saved their bacon with regard to their desire to switch off analogue broadcasts within the next decade.Originally posted by samkydd@May 26 2005, 02:04 PM
I've had a long old rant about Freeview before. I can't remember what* topic it was under now but I totally agree that providing channels for people on the basis that they have to go and buy another bit of kit is totally wrong, and the government should have stepped in and put a stop to it!
They knew that in order for this to be even vaguely feasible (whether this is still the case is very much open to debate), a successful terrestrial digital service would need to be up and running and serving the vast majority of the population - and the calamitous failure of ONDigital/ITV Digital threatened to set their plans back by years, if not eliminate them altogether. The BBC completely turned things around, and faster and more effectively than their wildest dreams.
You complain about "buying another bit of kit", but Freeview boxes cost a pittance these days - a one-off payment of fifty quid or so (less if you can pick up an old ITV Digital box second-hand: they should work perfectly well), and that's it.
This would rather defeat the purpose of BBC4 and Cbeebies in particular – the former was set up as a minority-interest channel, so it's unlikely it would have paid its way through advertising (at least not in its present risk-taking form), and one of the key attractions of Cbeebies, not least for parents, is the fact that it doesn't bombard impressionable children with ads for sweets, fizzy drinks and the like.The BBC should have done the Freeview channels as a commercial channel would, self financing from revenue through advertising.
Which is exactly the sort of thing a public-service channel should be doing.
I don't know that at all - on the contrary, the BBC Worldwide trading arm seems rather good at bringing money in. Out of curiosity, has anyone compared the BBC's non-licence-fee income with the costs of running the Freeview channels, given that the latter's budgets are tiny in programming terms? It would be intriguing to know if the former is greater than the latter.They drive us nuts with self-advertising of their own programmes and campaigns, charities etc so its not much different from annoying us with commercial adverts! But we all know that* the BBC are experts at spending money but not so good at bringing any in!
They're members of the European Broadcasting Union, as are numerous other Middle East countries. Lebanon was going to take part this year, until they discovered that they were contractually obliged to show the Israeli entry, which would have been illegal under their state television regulations.Anyway, on the subject of Eurovision, how long have Israel been in Europe? Or Malta, or Russia!
May I just point out that the "adverts" on UK Gold drive me absolutely nuts! They ruin the programming, so much that I can hardly bear to watch.
rgds
Rob
It's not so much the cost of box it's the principle of having to pay on top of the licence fee just to view programmes which are funded largely by that licence fee which annoys many folk!Originally posted by Wetherby Pond@May 26 2005, 04:02 PM
You complain about "buying another bit of kit", but Freeview boxes cost a pittance these days - a one-off payment of fifty quid or so (less if you can pick up an old ITV Digital box second-hand: they should work perfectly well), and that's it.*
They're members of the European Broadcasting Union, as are numerous other Middle East countries.* Lebanon was going to take part this year, until they discovered that they were contractually obliged to show the Israeli entry, which would have been illegal under their state television regulations.
Well such intolerance as Lebanon's just isn't acceptable in Europe these days, so out they go then! We won't tolerate it!
I would not claim it is a political song contest, although politics have their share in Eurovision. Several countries favour the candidate song of other countries for political reasons. For instance, Cyprus every year offers its 12 points to Greece, Cyprus' major ally, and Greece, not surprisingly, reciprocates every year those 12 points. Scandinavian countries help one another, other countries vote similarly favouring their neighbours or their allies, and it seems that those unacceptable alliances are a factor partially and considerably determining the winning song.
Perhaps the identities of the countries competing should be kept under wraps until after the voting, then it would be done on song and performance merit!Originally posted by Jeno solar brother@May 26 2005, 06:01 PM
I would not claim it is a political song contest, although politics have their share in Eurovision. Several countries favour the candidate song of other countries for political reasons. For instance, Cyprus every year offers its 12 points to Greece, Cyprus' major ally, and Greece, not surprisingly,* reciprocates every year those 12 points. Scandinavian countries help one another, other countries vote similarly favouring their neighbours or their allies, and it seems that those unacceptable alliances are a factor partially and considerably determining the winning song.**
Mind you it wouldn't be too hard to work out. Anything with a bazooki wailing in the background would be Greece or Cyprus, old fashioned out dated punkified gutteral rock would be from The Balkans, anything that sounded like "Ah wanna be a polar bear!" would be Israel, anything jerky with an overlong catchy chorus that sounds like a TV advert would be UK, anything bordering on folk music would be one of the Scandinavian countries, anything totally inane where the male singers all have moustaches would be Germany, and anything that sounded like it was on the BBC's Light Programme in 1962 would be France. Painfully expressed songs about virgin goatherds pining for their lost love who has been conscripted to fight the cause for freedom would be another ex Eastern Bloc state!
At the moment the countries are just like a Puppets On A String, Boom Bang A Banging their own drum, leaving powerful neighbours Making Your Mind Up for them, so Save All Your Kisses For Me and Congratulations, the wrong country's won again, and like a Jack In The Box they'll rarely be seen and despite promises of All Kinds Of Everything they'll Sing Little Birdie just the once before they meet their Waterloo!
The show is a complete pile of poo which has long since worn out its welcome!
It's up there with It's a Knockout - a symbol of an era long ago - time to give it an honourable funeral.
Discuss!
Sanndevil. . . . Discuss
So here goes, I do not think it is a pile of poo, I have always enjoyed it, what is beginning to let it down now is that English seems to be the norm and I would much sooner hear their own songs sung in their native tongue.
We should celebrate our differences in music; film; literature; architecture etc. and if Eurovision gives a glimpse of a different life (however odd) outside these shores then so much the better, let's have a bit of toleration. After all they tolerate our drunken oafs throughout the year.
Don't forget a lot of the countries featured now are just at the start of being part of free Europe as oppossed to Russia, and if they want to sing songs of freedom, and be proud of what they have achieved then what gives us the right to ridicule them. Whereas our parents came back after the war to democracy, others who returned to behind the iron curtain were not so fortunate.
Freddy
Sorry Freddy, but that is a non sequiteur.Originally posted by Freddy@May 26 2005, 10:02 PM
Whereas our parents came back after the war to democracy, others who returned to behind the iron curtain were not so fortunate.
Freddy
We are of course all entitled to our opinions, and I respect yours, but the reality of it is the acts have been hijacked by non-talents who tend to use the show to launch careers with threadbare talent (transexuals / actresses / performers with wardrobe malfunctions during the heats etc etc). It strikes me the show is getting to the point of diminishing returns - yes there have been notable exceptions but less in recent years. As pointed out in earlier posts, the voting is rigged which undermines the show as a 'contest'. Unless the show can offer something fresh (in terms of quality output as well as allowing entry for new countries) I fail to see why it is worthwhile keeping it going.
Your point about the songs being sung in English is an interesting one - they used to have to sing in their native tongues but this restriction was removed after lobbying by some of the smaller countries who felt they were being disadvantaged.
I just can't get excited about the show and resent it clogging the schedules - yes, once a year is too much for me - stick it on an obscure digital channel if it has to be aired.
I think we have to agree to disagree on this one!
Fair dos Sanndevil,
I must have been a bit grouchy after reading another forum, this time football, which was mostly full of back biting and jealousy after Liverpools win
regards
Freddy
I think most people enjoy it but the political voting makes a nonsense of the whole event. It's almost like a tacky and corrupt 1960s seaside bathing beauty competition!Originally posted by Freddy@May 26 2005, 10:02 PM
Sanndevil. . . . Discuss
So here goes,�* I do not think it is a pile of poo, I have always enjoyed it, what is beginning to let it down now is that English seems to be the norm�* and I would much sooner hear their own songs�* sung in their native tongue.
We should celebrate our differences in music; film; literature; architecture etc. and if Eurovision gives a glimpse of a different life (however odd) outside these shores then so much the better, let's have a bit of toleration.�* After all they tolerate our drunken oafs throughout the year.
Don't forget a lot of the countries featured now are just at the start of being part of�* free Europe as oppossed to Russia, and if they want to sing songs of freedom, and be proud of what they have achieved then what gives us the right to ridicule them.�* Whereas our parents came back after the war to democracy, others�* who returned to behind the iron curtain were not so fortunate.
Freddy
Surely buying a television in the first place is "paying on top of the licence fee"? Or do you object to that as well?Originally posted by samkydd@May 26 2005, 05:55 PM
It's not so much the cost of box it's the principle of having to pay on top of the licence fee just to view programmes which are funded largely by that licence fee which annoys many folk!
This is a more serious point than its apparent flippancy might suggest: there has always been a need to keep up to date with technology over and above the requirements of the licence fee - for instance, the transition from 405-line to 625-line broadcasts, from black and white to colour, from mono to stereo, 4:3 to 16:9, the introduction of Teletext and so on.
So unless you're seriously expecting the BBC to continue broadcasting black-and-white 405-line pictures and mono sound in order to avoid complaints about forcing people to buy new equipment "on top of the licence fee", I don't see what the problem is.
In any case, most programmes that premiere on the digital channels end up on BBC1 and BBC2 at some point, and usually sooner rather than later, so your implication that you're somehow being denied them is hugely misleading.
I was surprised to read over here that the Irish entry was voted out in the "semi-finals".
I didn't know there were any preliminary rounds leading up to the Eurovision Song Contest !!!!
The songs in the final are pretty dire so I cannot believe that there were actually songs deemed NOT worthy of the final. How bad were they?
Viewers arn't allowed to vote for performers but I must state that given the chance I'd like to give the young Greek girl one !
Dave.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote