You're confusing "original, authentic" with "automatically good" and "makes for interesting TV". Being "original and authentic" does not automatically make a song good. Also, even if a song is good, it doesn't mean it will automatically make for good TV.
You know why Croatia didn't qualify and why I knew for a fact they wouldn't? Because their performance was boring. And that often nets you something close to last place. None of the performers really tried to connect to the TV audience. They were either staring into space or at each other. It was also choir singing, which doesn't really make for riveting TV. Joe Blow, often watching the contest with friends and/or family, will instantly stop paying attention and start talking with their friends and/or family if they come across a boring entry, probably about how great some other entry they just saw was.
You could literally not look at the screen and miss absolutely nothing. Sure, it sounds nice, but at the end of the day, how many people who don't speak Croatian are going to remember them after hearing and seeing them (do absolutely nothing but sand around singing) only once?
You cannot in 2013 come to Eurovision and do what Croatia did and expect to do well, especially not in a semi-final with entries that were visually spectacular or at least interesting. Is it fair? Perhaps not. Not it's how things are nowadays.
Also, what entries besides Croatia's do you claim were "original, authentic"?