Credits
Written by
Published
Source(s)
News
There will be changes for improvement
EBU responds to voting changes
Can you say how many broadcasters have so far threatened to withdraw or have at least mentioned that they are considering it, if the voting procedure is not changed for the final next year?
"The rules and applications for the 2009 Eurovision Song Contest have not even been sent out yet, so the buzz about broadcasters withdrawing is premature, in my opinion. Every year, we see broadcasters reconsidering their participation for a broad range of reasons, which is their full right. We are happy to see though, that in a solid majority of the cases, broadcasters are very loyal to the Eurovision Song Contest".
In 2007 the EBU reacted to the many broadcasters' demands to change the qualification system for the final. The two semi final system appears to have worked and qualification seemed to be fair in 2008. How seriously is the EBU taking the need to change the voting system for the Eurovision Song Contest final?
"Every year, the contest is being evaluated by the Reference Group. Suggestions from EBU members and viewers, as well as figures are being taken into consideration. That might lead to changes, but not for the sake of change alone. It is improvement that should be the foundation of change. The need to change depends on the possibility to improve, and that is not always so simple as it looks. Should anything be improved for next year´s contest, you will most likely find out before the end of the year".
How many voting changes have been proposed on the questionnaire to broadcasters, and how will the EBU evaulate the responses?
"I have not seen the forms myself yet, so I would have to pass here. I can firmly state that we take the responses from our Members very seriously, and that the Reference Group will closely look into all suggestions - as ever. The same counts for ideas put forward by dedicated fans, by the way. We read all ideas, and ocasionally, a good idea makes it to the table at a Reference Group meeting. "
Ever since I have been following this great event, which I started long before I got the opportunity of working for the EBU, I have seen complaints from the fan community - besides the great passion and positive energy, of course. It is very easy to complain, or to talk about the need for change, but to actually come up with a good, workable idea has proven not to be easy. Good understanding of TV production is often important. Fortunately, the Reference Group is made up of very skilled people.
Dedicated fans with good ideas are always welcome to send those to info@eurovision.tv, by the way!"
Will the potential new voting methods on the questionnaire be published at any point?
"We never publish the evaluation forms from EBU Members after the Eurovision Song Contest".
Do you think the changes will be implemented for the 2009 competition?
"Every year, the EBU introduces changes in the format, either minor or major ones. I can say it is most likely that also in 2009, we will see changes. But as I said, only for the sake of improvement, and not for the sake of change alone. If that also involves changes in the voting for the final, it is yet to be decided. Don't forget that in essence, the voting system used in the final is already successfully in use for decades. We are proud of that, and it is well-known across Europe! Again, by the end of the year you will know more!"
Do you believe that complaints about political voting or that Western countries are at a disadvantage are valid?
"I think the term "political" is often misplaced in this context. I do not believe people vote for a neighbour country becáuse of the country, or for political reasons. But they do vote for a song in the same language, an artist they know too, shared cultural values that express themselves in music and so on. Thát kind of connections play a role in the decision to vote for a song".
In the case of the former Yugoslavia or Soviet Union for example, many people live in countries which they would not consider their 'natural homeland', for example Serbs in Bosnia, Croatians in Serbia, Ukrainians in Russia or Russians in Georgia. Do you think that where the numbers form a sizeable proportion of the population, there can be little doubt that pure televoting will result in an unbalanced result in the national televote?
"That people live in countries which they would not consider their 'natural homeland' is the result of history. The trend of globalization will only increase that. That is the reality of the world we live in. But we cannot and should not ask people for their passport when they vote - not to speak about the practical implications. Dedicated people vote with dedication, and you can sometimes see that in the results.
If others believe with the same dedication another song should win, I hope they will vote with the same dedication as well. With televoting, the excitement is truly in the hands of the viewers. All viewers!"
esctoday.com would like to thank Mr. Bakker for his open responses to our questions.
Related polls
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best national final
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Worst dressed performer/s
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best dressed performer/s
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best duo/group performance
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best preview video
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best male vocal performance
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best male performance
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best female vocal performance
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best female performance
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Lyricist(s) of the year
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Composer(s) of the year
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Best act not to qualify from the semi finals
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Most traditional Europop song
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Song of the year
- 2008 esctoday.com award nominations: Performance of the year
- First quarter final in Bulgaria: your favourite?
- Jury vote, do you agree?
- Jury vote only in the final or in the semis as well?
- What mixture of televote and jury vote do you think is the best?
Go directly to the reactions
Recent news about Other
esctoday.com award nominations: last days to vote 1
esctoday.com awards 2008: Your nominations (8) 108
esctoday.com awards 2008: Your nominations (7) 39
esctoday.com awards 2008: Your nominations (6) 40
Raiffeisen International still Eurovision sponsor 4
Reactions
When reacting to a news item, please stick to the topic. Inappropriate messages (swearing, racism, hate, etc.), messages in other languages than English and spam (which includes URL advertising) will be deleted and you risk your account being removed. Reacting on newsitems is only possible when logged in as a member. Still don't have member account?
Click here to react Click here to become a member (free!)
the saying that westerns has weak songs and that's why the do so badly is a cowardly eastern claim from people who fear that they won't be able to be in the top 5 EVERY year - just like Belarus last year were anti 2 semi finals and look how well it turned out
as a matter fact it just showed everyone how badly we need a new voting system / final countries voting only.
like Israel getting 5th in the semi above azerbaijan, Greece winning and Russia reaching ONLY the 3rd place ... without all it's mafia members to support, which when it did have their support of course they had no trouble winning the thing
actually it was easier than taking a candy from a baby.
@Molly Parton: I agree, except for your last mark. I don' think this will be an ideal solution. We can't "manipulate" the contest that far. Keep it the way it was done this year, the problem is the grande finale.
Do you believe that complaints about political voting or that Western countries are at a disadvantage are valid?
"I think the term "political" is often misplaced in this context. I do not believe people vote for a neighbour country becáuse of the country, or for political reasons. But they do vote for a song in the same language, an artist they know too, shared cultural values that express themselves in music and so on. Thát kind of connections play a role in the decision to vote for a song".
- Sietse you are a nice enough guy but this is utter drivel. Poland scored its only few points from the UK and Ireland this year. Neither of those countries are neighbours of Poland and the song wasn't in Polish. It was Poles in the UK and Ireland voting for Poland even though they probably had no idea who Isis Gee was. It's foreign nationals living abroad voting for their home country that causes the trouble. In Scandinavia it has clearly become a rule that every Scandinavian must vote for another Scandinavian. And every Icelander in Denmark must have 5 mobile phones set on redial to make sure Iceland gets 12 votes every year. It is all completely laughable. This year it ended up causing a song to win that virtually nobody liked.
It's straightforward enough:
1. Put the big 4 in the semi. It does the artists no good to end up last in the final and it gets harder and harder to find a fool (to represent the UK and France esoecially) who has such a huge ego that they don't realise they are going to finish last however fab they might be. Sebastien Tellier was just embarrassing live.
2. The countries that do not reach the final should not vote in it. Nobody is interested in finding out that when Ireland don't get through to the final, all the Latvians and Lithuanians in Ireland vote for Latvia and Lithuania because nobody Irish is watching.
3. When the number of voting countries is reduced, re-instate the full 12-10-8-7-6-5-4-3-2-1 announcement. It's much more fun than tediously watching 43 countries give votes when half of them aren't in it.
4. There must be a 50/50 jury/televote split. It has already been announced that had we had this system in 2007, then Turkey would have finished 14th and not 4th, and Germany would have finished 6th and not 19th. A much better reflection of the musical merit of the two entries.
5. The semi-final should be seeded. An expert panel should ensure that the two semi-finals, as well as being equally distributed by region, have an equal distribution of good and bad songs. This year's semi-final 1 was much, much weaker than semi-final 2. As a result, three or four decent songs from semi 2 were going to miss out and three or four rubbish songs from semi 1 were going to get through.
It does not exists a perfect system that comforts everybody. Perhaps no major changes in the voting system is needed, my opinion is that less countries should compete in the final, perhaps 15 will be enough, after some semifinals without televoting, only decided by an expert jury, like in the film festivals. Let's people televoting only for the final. The ESC has been always more that a musical contest. The current situation with the former Soviet and Yugoslavian republics happened here in Spain 40 years ago, when the ESC was seen a way to show Europe our best, usually well compensated at the end of the '60 and early the '70 with the best Spanish results and this was used domestically by the government from a nationalistic point of view. Now is time for the Eastern countries. Simply let's pass the time.
'''BIG 4 IN SEMI FINAL !!!!''''
agreed as long as it's a 45 way split on the funding of the event
Western Europe is in dire need of professional entrants. With a handful of exceptions, entrants are either a Pop Idol outcast or the hairdresser getting her chance to sing outside the local karaoke bar. Draft a professional crew, have a look at what the East Europeans and the Swedes are doing - many of their best artists and songwriters participate. Fact is, if Eastern Europe were thrown out quality of the song contest would drop even further... It has nothing to do with political voting at all.
BIG 4 IN SEMI FINAL !!!!
TOP 5 FROM LAST YEAR DIRECT IN FINAL !!!!
TELEVOTING / JURY : 50/50 !!!!!
I agree with you Sonja, he doesn't answer any of the questions fully or properly, just goes off on a completely different tangent!! I'm sure things will be changed this year, however I think the most likely changes will be the reintroduction of juries and the cancellation of SMS voting. I hope the juries are a mixture of professionals who take music and the contest seriously, as well as dedicated fans.
What a load of PR twaddle! He didn't answer any of the questions there! My God man - wake up and smell the coffee. The contest is dying on its feet in Western Europe because it's in dire need of some kind of professional influence in the voting.
@ James S
Good point!!!
@ drusus
I don't know what's more comical...the idea that diaspora voting doesn't dominate the contest or that the Big 4 haven't sent good songs (and that Armenia, Bosnia, Azerbaijan, etc always send great songs that deserve top 10 positions). Stil, this debate is redundant.. it's clear the EBU is about to make changes to save the contest from a slow death
Televoting - excitement, pleeasse! So exciting that even before any of the 2009 songs have been chosen we already know the top 5 countries - Russia, Ukraine, Greece etc As for last place take your pick - UK, Germany, Spain, Ireland etc And Belgium and the Netherlands could enter U2 and Madonna and still not make it past the semi's!
Sieste Bakker is just going on and on, he is really not saying much. This is a very long article about nothing. Kinda arrogant from my point of view
london calling - They should send better songs then. I didn't answer because I don't agree with that theory...Russia ( or Serbia last year ) wouldn't be able to win the contest with immigrants and diaspora votes only. Almost all countries gave pts to the winning entry - the power of the diaspora is overrated.
@ drusus
I don't just want Western countries to win. But I want them to have a CHANCE of winning but as they have no diasporas it won't happen. I notice you didn't answer my point about just who is voting for Russia...other Russians living abroad!
Yes, that was exactly my thought also just now when I finished reading this interview: A waste of time. Not onlt that Sietse Bakker isn't actually saying anythimng new, he is even taking backwards things that are already clear, like political voting; He says that they won't publish their broadcasters survey to the public & thinks that the current resualts are "because of personal music coltural identity of the immigrants" & not connected to political voting to their homelands? (for example) - So how people like him can realy bring a change to the current judging system if they don't see the current judging system as a damaging political voting??? This "exlucive interview" is realy a waste of time.
Only allowing the countries in the final to vote a/ won't solve anything because in any case, the same country would win and it would only slightly change the order of the others and b/ it would be unfair in my opinion..all the countries should have a say about the winner.
If there are some changes, it should be something simple, profitable to the EBU (or they won't agree to it) and as fair as possible to everyone..the last one I really think is difficult because even with juries I'm not sure there wouldn't be prejudices, maybe more than with televoting.
I'd agree to try the 50/50 system but I would like to see the results of this year's juries first...many people have asked for them, why can't we see them? Even if they are totally different to televoting, it would help us see how the juries vote, their criteria.
And most of all I would like the one vote/per phone rule although that would mean losing money and I don't think the EBU will ever agree to it.
Sietse has perfected the art of saying absolutely nothing at all and never answering a direct question.
Give the man a job in Brussels or at the UN - what a talent!
@London calling : Your last comment just proved me right - you just want some western countries to win, no matter what cause as you rightfully noticed, Russia would have won anyway - even without the votes from the semi finalists. People simply liked the song and performance ! The UK and Germany wouldn't have scored at all without the votes from the semi finalists btw !! Change it as much as you like, good songs will always do well and weak songs will always fail : only a weired old jury could decide a winner against the democratic will of the viewers !
PS : Some of you said the second semi was a success ?? Hell no, it wasn't ! How can a jury pick a horror like " Hero " over the quality entries from Hungary or Cyprus ?! Even Switzerland would have been a better choice....no, the second semi was just another argument against the jury ! Let the people decide.
@ Filipe
When the EBU decide they don't want to take all that lovely Big 4 money.
The 2 semi final system works; it was great and the best songs came through as noted previously. What should happen for the final though is that the countries left behind join a vote called "SEMI 1" and "SEMI 2". Each country votes and once our beloved idiot Svanteus gets them, he then creates the 1-8,10 and 12 votes from each semi final. With this, Russia would still be our winner from the UKraine 174-157, Norway would have come third, followed by Greece and Armenia. This way the YK and Germany would have also received no votes. But the favoritism that the 'allied' countries have will be lessened.
It's just an idea - id say it wont be used.
Bla-bla-bla-bla-bla ....
Why intervew a man who has nothing interesting to say?
why do people still cling to the idea that only allowing countries in the Final to vote would make the voting any different? Plenty of people have pointed out that this makes NO difference. For example the Russian diaspora in 2008 were in the Final in force (Ukraine, Latvia, Georgia, Azerbaijan, Armenia, Israel..). Those votes alone gave Russia a winning margin in the voting.
"The two semi final format worked out very well, so it'd be reasonable to only let the countries participating in the final vote in the final too."
Sounds good to me.
@ Luis Almeida, I agree with your comment.
Maybe the only "fair" voting system would be a jury formed by people coming from Countries not taking part in the ESC, so that they have no interest at all in letting one Country win instead of another. Still, even then we would never be sure. Any voting system can be corrupted in some way.
@ Muireanne & Robbert
that is exactly the problem that occurs in countries like Ireland, Germany, Netherlands and Belgium
yet svante ignores it (i remember that interview he had with 12points.tv, and he said that u cant convince a whole nation to vote for one country - but thats exactly it, the majority are voting for an even spread, whereas a significant minority vote for the same country, meaning they always get high points)
The list of 60 reactions is divided into 3 pages. Choose a page:
1 | 2 | 3
React yourself
This news article is older than one week. Reacting to articles is only possible in the first week after publication.
