I copy-paste my post from the general thread also here, as I think it fits this thread to.
Oh, we have another scandal coming. RTV SLO is reporting that Maltese public is fuming. Ex-representative Ludwing Galea (2004) accused the Maltese delegation in an open letter of inflating the actual chances of the Maltese win by paying for bets as well as called out the whole delegation to reveal how much money has been spent for bets, ads and generating clics/trends on YT, which gave false hopes to Maltese people of winning the ESC. Basically, the problem, as noted by Galea, is that this happened already with Ira Losco in 2017.
RTV SLO's reporter and ESC connoiseur Klavdija Kopina also takes up the question of likes and dislikes in YT clips. Clearly, the most desperate countries to win invest a lot of money to overhype a song by paying people in foreign countries to click the song, which leads to the trending effect. Analysts are said to have discovered that the biggest discrepancies between likes/dislikes have been detected for Malta, Georgia, North Macedonia, Germany, Denmark, Poland, Sweden and Switzerland (please, note that there is no Moldova on this list, as some people have been very vocal these days that Kirkorov bought votes for Natalia), while on the other hand there are no discrepancies for Ukraine, Russia, Italy, Cyprus and Latvia. Basically, we are talking about paid views which generates hype, high spot in betting odds, but eventually leads to flops and huge disappointment.
Yes, one more interesting thing: the article raises also the question/problem of "blogs" (Wiwibloggs is named by name) that are also paid to generate hype, turn our attention to certain songs, so that these appear "fan favorite" and "hot to win". These "fan blogs and sites" (ESC United is not problematized nor mentioned, thank god) are thus problem in itself and their practices are not properly represented to the audiences.
Now, what I would like to add to all this is that I do not find a problem with generating views, paying Wiwibloggs to hype a song etc. My problem is that betting odds and different statistics can and surely do influence the jury votes. I know that the common viewers who tune in on Saturday's final usually do not care or watch what is going on before the ESC, but juries surely are paying attention. You know, like political polls can create opinions and influence how people vote, I am sure that YT views, hype, and betting odds also influence the juries' votes. I am sure that many members of juries do want to please "people", but as this article on RTV SLO now analyses the whole matter, the question is: is it really people behind these odds, YT views and independent fan-websites?
So, to sum it up, I was right this whole time. Would Albina qualify if she was as much hyped as Malta? Since Albina suffered in jury voting most, I'd say yes. Finally, this also explains why Romania (which was way more hyped before the show than Slovenia and Macedonia) finished in jury votes before Slovenia, although EVERYONE agreed that Ana's vocals are from outer space. So... I think we have a true scandal here and some unpleasant questions need to be asked as well as answered... Good day folks.
PS: Why have I mentioned Albina first? Cuz she missed out finals for 5 points against Norway, the clics of which do not add up. That is why Albina and Croatia missed the finals.