Running order for 2013

[A-lister]

I mean I get what they are doing, to a certain point... They want to ensure exciting show and prevent things like 5 ballads going one after another... but still this is just wrong... I mean even if they do not fix the draw or try something suspicious, people will still accuse them of being corrupt and fixing the show... Nothing good can possibly come out of this for SVT or Eurovision in general...

Will they even use pots from last year or will there be a possibility of, for example. all exyu countries being in one semi...

This is bad...

... well what they do is highly immoral for sure, and anti-democratic.

Yes, I also 'get' what they're trying to do, but still though we in Sweden are used by a total biased line-up in MF (with Björkman's favs and friends getting the best positions) and that's the last thing I want to see will happen in ESC!

Also, SVT might try to be neutral atleast, but just imagine this rule in some more corrupt countries? Gosh this is idiotic!

 

[A-lister]

I guess you're right in the observation that the ESC reference-group (whoever are in this group) is focusing on the contest as a TV show and prioritizing issues supporting this, rather than wishes from ESC enthusiasts. On the other hand, the ESC enthusiasts seem overly conservative and against any changes. I'm not sure where my opinions are. The only argument so far against the idea is the suspicion of corruption, right? So a system that effectively removes any chances of corruption, but gives the TV producers more freedom than simply chance, would surely be better or what?

I don't believe for a second the ESC reference-group are evil morons or paid off by someone. They must have thought this through carefully.

The decision is highly undemocratic so it fits SVT well I guess...

Yes they are evil morons... end of discussion.

I hope countries will drop out, this will do much harm to the contest than help it... corruption here we go!

 

[anto475]

I guess you're right in the observation that the ESC reference-group (whoever are in this group) is focusing on the contest as a TV show and prioritizing issues supporting this, rather than wishes from ESC enthusiasts. On the other hand, the ESC enthusiasts seem overly conservative and against any changes. I'm not sure where my opinions are. The only argument so far against the idea is the suspicion of corruption, right? So a system that effectively removes any chances of corruption, but gives the TV producers more freedom than simply chance, would surely be better or what?

I don't believe for a second the ESC reference-group are evil morons or paid off by someone. They must have thought this through carefully.

I agree with what you're saying, but I have to take issue with the idea of the Reference Group looking at the ESC as purely a TV show. It's a song contest first and foremost, and making changes like this is stupid. If they want more ratings for it or whatever it is they want by looking at it as a TV show, then encourage the national broadcasters to come up with better and more inclusive ways of picking songs. I mean Sweden and Germany always have large numbers watching, and that's because they have national finals that are modern and have an actual format. The UK and Ireland, however, one just selects a failing artist internally, the other just puts up 5 people that were unknown on a chat show and then we pick a winner.

On a side note, I've been reading up on this (I should be doing an essay, why can't I incorporate Eurovision into my course!?), and Jon Ola Sand said that the change will make it “more exciting” and “allows each contestant to stand out, instead of being surrounded by entries in a similar style or tempo. Or in other words, countries that select songs that we (Reference Group) think are good, will stand a better chance at qualifying than songs that we think are boring. Stinks of corruption.

 

[A-lister]

I agree with what you're saying, but I have to take issue with the idea of the Reference Group looking at the ESC as purely a TV show. It's a song contest first and foremost, and making changes like this is stupid. If they want more ratings for it or whatever it is they want by looking at it as a TV show, then encourage the national broadcasters to come up with better and more inclusive ways of picking songs. I mean Sweden and Germany always have large numbers watching, and that's because they have national finals that are modern and have an actual format. The UK and Ireland, however, one just selects a failing artist internally, the other just puts up 5 people that were unknown on a chat show and then we pick a winner.

On a side note, I've been reading up on this (I should be doing an essay, why can't I incorporate Eurovision into my course!?), and Jon Ola Sand said that the change will make it “more exciting” and “allows each contestant to stand out, instead of being surrounded by entries in a similar style or tempo. Or in other words, countries that select songs that we (Reference Group) think are good, will stand a better chance at qualifying than songs that we think are boring. Stinks of corruption.

If anything this encourages corruption. Also it WON'T help it to become more popular, because people don't like corruption and if their countries will be 'unlucky' they'll blame it on the new corrupt system.

 

[anto475]

If anything this encourages corruption. Also it WON'T help it to become more popular, because people don't like corruption and if their countries will be 'unlucky' they'll blame it on the new corrupt system.

And then interest will quickly go and then countries will withdraw and we'll end up with a much smaller and therefore weaker contest. Well done ref group!

 

[A-lister]

And then interest will quickly go and then countries will withdraw and we'll end up with a much smaller and therefore weaker contest. Well done ref group!

Exactly! This WON'T encourage viewers if that's what they think.

 

[r3gg13]

Though I honestly don't like the idea of the producers choosing spots for songs, it just doesn't feel right that a small group of people have control over who gets to be in what draw because the draw does matter, even if it's only a tiny bit.

I think that some good can come out of it. From a show perspective, at least the chances of having the same types of songs next to each other will be minimized. I like that part. In this way upstaging between songs of similar type can be avoided.

 

[alca]

I think that some good can come out of it. From a show perspective, at least the chances of having the same types of songs next to each other will be minimized. I like that part. In this way upstaging between songs of similar type can be avoided.

But that would be acceptable, even great, if it wasn't a contest! If it was just a night where 25 artists would sing their song and then go home! But we're talking about a contest here where the running order has a big part when it comes to the final placing of each entry!

 

[A-lister]

Though I honestly don't like the idea of the producers choosing spots for songs, it just doesn't feel right that a small group of people have control over who gets to be in what draw because the draw does matter, even if it's only a tiny bit.

I think that some good can come out of it. From a show perspective, at least the chances of having the same types of songs next to each other will be minimized. I like that part. In this way upstaging between songs of similar type can be avoided.

Exactly, following MF logic we will know each year from now on which songs will end up in the best positions. Also it's best to end last... I don't like this at all, why should a little group decide such a thing? Also this will encourage corruption, countries will eventually start paying for good positions...

Well, it's true from a show perspective, but then again this small group will decide which ballads/and uptempo 'worthy' of closing (the best positions) and which will get the jumbo positions...

 

[A-lister]

But that would be acceptable, even great, if it wasn't a contest! If it was just a night where 25 artists would sing their song and then go home! But we're talking about a contest here where the running order has a big part when it comes to the final placing of each entry!

Exactly, this is certainly an undemocratic interference in the contest which will now give some songs upper-hand, and not in a fair unbiased matter.

 

[r3gg13]

But that would be acceptable, even great, if it wasn't a contest! If it was just a night where 25 artists would sing their song and then go home! But we're talking about a contest here where the running order has a big part when it comes to the final placing of each entry!

To rebut, the songs being placed in spots ideal for them in comparison to other songs in the contest, it will give that song capability to shine in a fairer way. I think that has more of an effect than the running order in and of itself. It's easier to shine, as a ballad when surrounded by uptempo songs rather than in a sea of ballads, same goes for every genre.

Needless to say, the running order does have importance to it, but not to the point that it is the sole deciding factor in winning. The best song, wherever you put it will be the best song. It will overcast the other songs wherever you put it.

 

[Mickey]

Does anyone know where to find a rigorous statistical analysis on the impact of the Eurovision running order? We're pretty confident that the draw plays a big part in deciding the winner, but only fairly anecdotally. If you could provide clear mathematical proof for that, expressed in an academic manner, then any petitions/protests to broadcasters would carry greater weight.

 

[Matt]

Imagine the countries reaction who were assigned an early draw. They'll be pissed. Statistics show that an early draw decreases your odds of winning/doing well. Imagine if all Scand

I would be okay if SVT chooses the voting order to make it more of a nail biter but this......

I'm appalled and outraged by this decision. I truly hope the fans and clubs will come together on this one and fight it.

 

[AdelAdel]

So... they can assign Sweden to the best position in the final between boring songs, right?

 

[A-lister]

Imagine the countries reaction who were assigned an early draw. They'll be pissed. Statistics show that an early draw decreases your odds of winning/doing well. Imagine if all Scand

I would be okay if SVT chooses the voting order to make it more of a nail biter but this......

I'm appalled and outraged by this decision. I truly hope the fans and clubs will come together on this one and fight it.

I'm actually happy that we finally found a common ground against EBU!! It's about damn time we get together!

 

[CPV4931]

So... they can assign Sweden to the best position in the final between boring songs, right?

No... the starting position of the host country will be drawn (but it will be the only one to be drawn)

 

[r3gg13]

No... the starting position of the host country will be drawn (but it will be the only one to be drawn)

But they can put whatever song before or after Sweden

 

[anto475]

Does anyone know where to find a rigorous statistical analysis on the impact of the Eurovision running order? We're pretty confident that the draw plays a big part in deciding the winner, but only fairly anecdotally. If you could provide clear mathematical proof for that, expressed in an academic manner, then any petitions/protests to broadcasters would carry greater weight.

i think it's either nulpoints or douzepoints or something like that, they have very good stats on this kind of thing, i saw them in some website's list of 50 Eurovision sites or something

 

[CPV4931]

But they can put whatever song before or after Sweden

I just thought about that ^^ That´s indeed right - thx :-)

 

[Mickey]

i think it's either nulpoints or douzepoints or something like that, they have very good stats on this kind of thing, i saw them in some website's list of 50 Eurovision sites or something

I'm looking for something more academic, though. A qualified statistician carries more weight than some guy with a blog.