2019 JURY BEWILDERMENT AND AMUSEMENT THREAD

[LakZaNokte]

This year both jury and televote 12 pts was for Italy.
In our semi, both jury and televote 12 was Macedonia.

In 2017 same thing in finale - 12 pts for Hungary from both.

 

[Realest]

To be honest I think most of the Juries are less corrupt than people think. I think most of them just sit there and do their Job whether we agree or not.

 

[midnightsun]

Well, just look in the comments on YouTube below the video, Sean made about the juries.
Someone commented he was in the Cypriot jury in 1996 and they wanted to give Greece 6 points, if I remember correctly, but the head of the jury would not allow this because allegedly they were supposed to give more points to Greece, so they ended up giving 10 to them.
His conclusion: yes, juries can be influenced!

 

[midnightsun]

So, another thought just came to my mind.
What, if juries were supposed to judge a song in different categories?
Because the main problem is often, they give points for a song they simply like. But that, imo, is the task of the viewers at home.
Jury’s should rate a song keeping the criteria in mind but they almost never do.
But what if they were forced to think about the criteria and write it down for everyone to see?

I give an example. Let’s say the juries would have to rate a song in the three categories voice, song composition, performance (including staging, visuals etc.). They give points from 1-5, when 1 is very bad, 2 little flaws, 3 ok, 4 good, 5 very good. (Or something similar)

Just playing around with some songs...

N. Macedonia
Juror #1: voice: 5 / song composition: 5 because he liked the message / performance: 5 because he thinks simple staging means real music = 15 points overall
Juror #2: voice: 5 / song composition: 3 because he thinks the melody is a bit boring and too tragic for a ESC / performance: 4 because the dress was too much for him but otherwise it was good = 12 points

You get my idea? The criteria and point system was just an example (not how it should be done) of how more complex a jury must actually judge a song (which they never do imo).
At first I thought juries should get lesser time to judge but the more I think about it, the more I think juries should have some time before to contest to analyze the songs thoroughly so that they just have to adapt their points in the finals concerning live voice and staging.*

* I think this is what the juries did pre-televote-times. Wasn’t it like that they wrote down their points some time before the show and never on the actual show? So only the song composition mattered, not the voice or staging etc. because they didn’t vote in the final but earlier?

So juries are imo for analyzing songs on the basis of musical criteria and the public for the ad hoc votes, spontaneously voting for what their guts say.

 

[LakZaNokte]

At first I thought juries should get lesser time to judge but the more I think about it, the more I think juries should have some time before to contest to analyze the songs thoroughly so that they just have to adapt their points in the finals concerning live voice and staging.*

* I think this is what the juries did pre-televote-times. Wasn’t it like that they wrote down their points some time before the show and never on the actual show? So only the song composition mattered, not the voice or staging etc. because they didn’t vote in the final but earlier?

So juries are imo for analyzing songs on the basis of musical criteria and the public for the ad hoc votes, spontaneously voting for what their guts say.

Don’t think so.
They have been punishing bad performances through years. Also, awarding good ones, regardless of the song itself.

What u’re saying is that they should basically judge based on studio versions. But that’s not esc then. Esc is live show
They judge jury performance, and it’s also ad hoc, for that matter.

In the spirit of live esc, they shouldn’t be listening to studio versions at all before the show because, what’s the point of performing live then?

 

[midnightsun]

No, I wrote they could listen to the songs before the contest like every other person so that they could already assess the songs in advance (for themselves, on their paper, pc or whatever) so they would only have to add points for the live voice in the finals, also on their own, in addition to their thoughts they already made. Otherwise they wouldn’t be able to judge all songs properly due to the lack of time.

Actually I just wanted to point out that the juries should take their time to analyze every song properly. Voice, performance, composition, whatever, in the weeks before the contest starts. And then give their points in the same moment the televoters do. You can influence a lot when you know the jury points one day in advance.

 

[dogmeat]

So, another thought just came to my mind.
What, if juries were supposed to judge a song in different categories?
Because the main problem is often, they give points for a song they simply like. But that, imo, is the task of the viewers at home.
Jury’s should rate a song keeping the criteria in mind but they almost never do.
But what if they were forced to think about the criteria and write it down for everyone to see?

I give an example. Let’s say the juries would have to rate a song in the three categories voice, song composition, performance (including staging, visuals etc.). They give points from 1-5, when 1 is very bad, 2 little flaws, 3 ok, 4 good, 5 very good. (Or something similar)

Just playing around with some songs...

N. Macedonia
Juror #1: voice: 5 / song composition: 5 because he liked the message / performance: 5 because he thinks simple staging means real music = 15 points overall
Juror #2: voice: 5 / song composition: 3 because he thinks the melody is a bit boring and too tragic for a ESC / performance: 4 because the dress was too much for him but otherwise it was good = 12 points

You get my idea? The criteria and point system was just an example (not how it should be done) of how more complex a jury must actually judge a song (which they never do imo).
At first I thought juries should get lesser time to judge but the more I think about it, the more I think juries should have some time before to contest to analyze the songs thoroughly so that they just have to adapt their points in the finals concerning live voice and staging.*

* I think this is what the juries did pre-televote-times. Wasn’t it like that they wrote down their points some time before the show and never on the actual show? So only the song composition mattered, not the voice or staging etc. because they didn’t vote in the final but earlier?

So juries are imo for analyzing songs on the basis of musical criteria and the public for the ad hoc votes, spontaneously voting for what their guts say.

You're assuming it's possible to have a mathematic formula to measure a song's quality. It's not. That's not how any of it works.

 

[LakZaNokte]

No, I wrote they could listen to the songs before the contest like every other person so that they could already assess the songs in advance (for themselves, on their paper, pc or whatever) so they would only have to add points for the live voice in the finals, also on their own, in addition to their thoughts they already made. Otherwise they wouldn’t be able to judge all songs properly due to the lack of time.

Actually I just wanted to point out that the juries should take their time to analyze every song properly. Voice, performance, composition, whatever, in the weeks before the contest starts. And then give their points in the same moment the televoters do. You can influence a lot when you know the jury points one day in advance.

Ok, and how would they listen to the songs before the contest if not studio versions?

Again, esc is not about judging studio versions, if it was, the show wouldn’t be live. Also, it wouldn’t be half the fun it is now
In studio you can make me sound like freakin Celine Dion. Literally.

P.S. I do not sound like Celine Dion, just to make clear

 

[midnightsun]

Ok, and how would they listen to the songs before the contest if not studio versions?

That's why I wrote they have to keep the live voices in mind. Basically I meant they should do whatever they already do now only a bit more detailed. So if someone, for example, gave Serhat 5 points (the best) for voice in the semi 1, we'd knew that he didn't stick by the criteria.

 

[BorisBubbles]

I disagree. Enjoyment isn't a sliding scale or something you can chart with mere statistics. Authenticity, suspence, relatability or humour can do a lot to elevate songs as well but are harder to identify at first glance.

Besides, how would you come up with a fair tool for grading songs in the first place? Which parametres would you use? And even if you come up with the right parametres, how would you weigh them? Equally? Maybe some, such as act and song, are more important than others but again, how much more important than the others? You risk creating a template for ESC songs if you do this and it won't be long before every internal selection will follow said template to a dime, at the expense of authenticity.

If anything, juration should be more intuitive because using a strict grading method is exactly what prevents jurors to go for songs such as Spirit in the sky; purely looking at composition or meaning or even vocals doesn't tell the whole story.

 

[lavieenrose]

To be honest I think most of the Juries are less corrupt than people think. I think most of them just sit there and do their Job whether we agree or not.

I SORT OF agree. What I do agree with you on is that they aren't corrupt at heart.* But I do diverge from you in that I think the juries are given so little guidance re: what they're supposed to do that conflating corruption with what ends up happening is super easy and understandable. The Belarusian jury colluding w/one another, for example, strikes me as something that wouldn't've happened if there'd been someone in the room like, "hey, don't do that."

* Or at least not beyond expectations.

 

[Neo]

To be honest I think most of the Juries are less corrupt than people think. I think most of them just sit there and do their Job whether we agree or not.

So it was just a coincidence Greece found the Cyprus entry the best of all, and vice versa? And all the other blatant neighbourly votes?

Come on.

 

[Realest]

So it was just a coincidence Greece found the Cyprus entry the best of all, and vice versa? And all the other blatant neighbourly votes?

Come on.

I said most of them.

Greece voted for local Fame and Hitpotential I guess. I would have done the Same in their Situation. Better than giving 12 Points to a Random Italian/Dutch etc.. who People in Greece will never ever hear from in the Future. Cyprus 12 Points to Greece on the other Side were ridiculous, I admit. As far as I know, she is unknown in Cyprus. Most of the Other other Countries who got 12 from their Neighbours ended uup in the Top5 with one of the Votings, so noone can f.e. accuse the danish/finnish Juries of political Voting..

Btw. if Juries dont vote for their Neighbours, people complain about Discrepancys between Juries and TV, so I dont get the Problem.

 

[Neo]

But what if they were forced to think about the criteria and write it down for everyone to see?

I've heard rumoured there's something called 'the green paper' that juries are handed out by EBU with instructions how to vote, for example that vocals should be rewarded.

But even if they are not instructed, I bet their task is obvious to them. To educate the unwashed ESC masses about good taste and root out the 'Eurovision' -factor that most music professionals detest.

 

[Kaz]

Some other strange tidbits found from looking at the the full results:
--> In the semi-final, juror Gent Rushi ranked 4th and 15th. In the final, he ranked 15th and 6th.
--> In the semi-final, juror Christine Anu ranked 4th, above five qualifiers: . In the final, she ranked dead last.
--> In the semi-final, juror Mark Cummins ranked 1st and 16th. In the final, he ranked 19th and 16th. He ranked his favourite song from the semi-final lower than his least favourite song from the semi-final.

I find it so bizarre that these jurors can change their rankings so drastically in two days. Surely this is an indication that they don't really give too much thought to their specific rankings beyond the top few places.

 

[hijirio]

It's a scandal lol if they asked me to be a juror for ESC i would write an argumentative essay for each point i give

 

[Alaska49]

Some other strange tidbits found from looking at the the full results:
--> In the semi-final, juror Gent Rushi ranked 4th and 15th. In the final, he ranked 15th and 6th.
--> In the semi-final, juror Christine Anu ranked 4th, above five qualifiers: . In the final, she ranked dead last.
--> In the semi-final, juror Mark Cummins ranked 1st and 16th. In the final, he ranked 19th and 16th. He ranked his favourite song from the semi-final lower than his least favourite song from the semi-final.

I find it so bizarre that these jurors can change their rankings so drastically in two days. Surely this is an indication that they don't really give too much thought to their specific rankings beyond the top few places.

these examples are APPALLING and really make me think the current method of making juries rank every single entry is absolutely untenable. it's negatively impacting the results. just make each juror pick a top 10, good lord. add the five top 10s together, check which ten countries got the most points, bam, a jury result. this way we also are spared of the "armenia and azerbaijan ranked each other 26th and BOOOOOO!!!" drama which is more stale than kirkorov's hair at this point.

 

[Etanna]

these examples are APPALLING and really make me think the current method of making juries rank every single entry is absolutely untenable. it's negatively impacting the results. just make each juror pick a top 10, good lord. add the five top 10s together, check which ten countries got the most points, bam, a jury result. this way we also are spared of the "armenia and azerbaijan ranked each other 26th and BOOOOOO!!!" drama which is more stale than kirkorov's hair at this point.

letting them rank only top 10 songs would just enable them to be more lazy with it. Not sure how to rank Iceland or Portugal? easy, just don't put it in the top ten and no need to judge their performances at all. It would just hide the inconsistencies in the jury voting, not solve them.
Also if say a song was ranked 11th by every juror and than another song would be ranked really high (1st/2nd) by one juror and dead last by every other juror, guess which song would get no points in the end? It wouldn't matter if you're 11th or 26th with the juries anymore.

 

[Realest]

Exponential Juryvoting is the perfect Midway between Top10 and linear Top26 Ranking and must stay. Its also more interesting or us Fans to analyze, besides the Fact that its mathematically more just.

 

[A-lister]

these examples are APPALLING and really make me think the current method of making juries rank every single entry is absolutely untenable. it's negatively impacting the results. just make each juror pick a top 10, good lord. add the five top 10s together, check which ten countries got the most points, bam, a jury result. this way we also are spared of the "armenia and azerbaijan ranked each other 26th and BOOOOOO!!!" drama which is more stale than kirkorov's hair at this point.

letting them rank only top 10 songs would just enable them to be more lazy with it. Not sure how to rank Iceland or Portugal? easy, just don't put it in the top ten and no need to judge their performances at all. It would just hide the inconsistencies in the jury voting, not solve them.
Also if say a song was ranked 11th by every juror and than another song would be ranked really high (1st/2nd) by one juror and dead last by every other juror, guess which song would get no points in the end? It wouldn't matter if you're 11th or 26th with the juries anymore.

Both valid, yet contraditive, points...

I think, seeing how the juries behave, we should rather scrap them altogether or limit their powers since clearly no matter what we do they still ruin the show