Be My Valentine wasn't even released in Japan.
Neither was "Düm Tek Tek". Düm Tek Tek charted on the
airplay charts, which are charts monitoring how often songs are played on the radio. The Japanese just liked the song so much they decided to play it on the radio...
a lot.
Plus, we're talking about live performances on the night.
But that's not what the juries are instructed to judge. They are to judge the 2nd dress rehearsal. Also, how many times must I point out that the juries are instructed to not put vocal prowess before song quality?
Scooch charted higher than FAIRYTALE and all other recent British acts.
In the U.K.. When speaking of how well a Eurovision entry charts, I generally mean internationally, not in the country of origin.
If so, then it stands for your judgment as well. Hence, you're contradicting yourself with those very two words.
Except I back my statements up with things other than my own personal opinion.
Six bloggers with significant Eurovision experience (very likely more than 99 % of the juries) who have to learned to judge songs based on whatever standard they're judged at Eurovision.
Except those standards no longer apply.
"Eurovision good" is no longer the standard by which one is to judge songs, at least not if one is in the professional juries. Also, those six bloggers were
wrong. Albania wan't even Top 6 in the televote.
And what musical education do those bloggers have? Do any of them have any background in the professional music industry? Or is their claim to fame having blogged about Eurovision for many years and bein able to predict Eurovision results nominally well (despite being wrong in this one instance)?
If six people say something is "brilliant" then the judgment of the (song quality/vocal performance/stage presentation combined) could fluctuate to being "good" or even "average" but not to freakin' 23rd.
Six people calling something brilliant does not mean it's good or even average. You're confusing cause with effect.
Except every single professional music industry professional and entertainment journalist who specializes in Eurovision
agrees with me.
It's not just my own personal opinion. It's consensus among anyone with a musical background or a background in performing in front of an audience.
Of what significance are the opinions of 6 bloggers who don't even make any money on their musical blogging? Besides, who are these 6 bloggers, anyway? Care to link to their blog entries?
Very interesting that (anonymous) professional and semi-professional critics devoted time to analyze a performance that placed 17th.
Funny that you'd call them "anonymous" when you have yet to name your own sources. And of course they'd analyze the performance. It's their
job (for which they are
paid) to analyze
every entry in the Eurovision Song Contest each year.
MY POINT. Albania was a more "serious" entry (although I prefer France 2010 to it) and perceived as more serious.
Why should that matter? You can be a "serious" entry without actually being good.
Okay, so "it's a package" now? Not "song quality". Decide on one version please.
I never said that the juries are instructed to look
only at song quality. Song quality is a pretty big deal for the juries, though.
Please define how someone's vocals could be almost flawless but not be professional?
You call Kejsi Stola's vocals almost flawless? Also, your vocals can be
technically good without being professionally good. Listen to Kejsi Stola's live performance without the video feed. It's pretty flat and inflection-less, not necessarily due to her own limitation but also potentially due to how the song was written. It's quite monotonous.
How was Hadise professional when you could here her breath throughout the performance and she wasn't even a good dancer?
At least she had charisma. She looked into the cameras at the right time and connected with the audience. Also, her song was harder to sing than Kejsi's (except for high notes, but that's another issue).
And what did Kejsi do when it came to choreogaphy? Dip and sway a bit.
I'm referring to their comments which came from watching the 2nd Dress Rehearsal on the Press Arena.
So... unconfirmed secondary conjecture. And these bloggers actually went back and said that Kejsi was better during the 2nd dress rehearsal than live? Or do you just assume they think so because they praised Kejsi's 2nd dress rehearsal performance?
Only the "strange" parts. The song
is monotonous. The bridge
is low (harmonically).
And the songs' studio version appeal makes it enough for juries to bump it up so high that it ends up finishing ahead of entries like ESTONIA, United Kingdom and Bosnia on the final scoreboard?
"Thunder and Lightning" was bland entry with mediocre vocals and an uninteresting stage show (in my opinion). I can see why the juries didn't really like it. What was so special about he CD version, anyway? It's not like it went on to do well outside of Eurovision, either.
Also, there's a
huge flaw in your argument in that the juries rated Estonia and the United Kingdom
higher than Turkey. In fact, they gave the United Kingdom almost
twice as many points as they gave Turkey.
The job of the juries is not to penalize entries they think will get a lot of diaspora or block votes but to give entries a normalized score according to how they think their countries woul vote were it not for diaspora or block voting.
The only way or the juries to prevent Turkey from placing ahead of Estonia and the United Kingdom in 2009 would've been for them to subtract a bajillion points from "Düm Tek Tek" simply for being from Turkey.
Once again, you've misunderstood me. For me, Ukraine should've been 1st on the jury scoreboard in the semifinal.
Really? "Sweet People" ahead of "Me and My Guitar" and "Satellite"? Whatever. I guess the juries aren't doing their jobs because they don't agree with your every opinion.
I think that the juries should serve as a logical/traditional mechanism which distinguishes legitimate, live performances and rewards them while allowing the public to vote for entries like "Pirates of the Sea" or "Dum tek tek", the type they've always voted for.
Except
they already are that with the special provision that voting forth good songs is more important than voting forth good vocalists (but being a good vocalist certainly helps).
