It was apt that one of the last things to happen in Malmo was the winner, Nemo, inadvertently breaking the Eurovision trophy—what a novel way to sum up this year’s contest. The behaviour of many delegations has created cracks that could take a long time to heal.
But one thing still exists as the contest moves into its 69th year: voting. This year was the most contentious yet, what with the existing political backdrop. But there are solutions. Eurovision, as it was in Malmo, must be buried away for eternity. New green shoots must be allowed to develop, which means the EBU has to press the reset button. The question is: will they?
As we meander our way through the period called ‘Post Eurovision Blues’, I’m certain that the bigwigs at the EBU will be waiting patiently for the ‘brouhaha’ to calm down for another year. It’s not uncommon, after all, that after every contest there’s some kind of controversy, but this year has been one big controversy.
Just as telephones changed to satellite links in 1994, just as televoting was introduced in 1997, just as semi-finals were introduced in 2004, and just as the current voting was split in two in 2016, something needs to happen for 2025!
And what that is is anyone’s guess, but voting has nearly always been an issue for me as a fan of the contest since watching it in my jammies in 1977.
THE VOTING IS STILL A PROBLEM
Throughout its almost 70-year existence, the Eurovision Song Contest has tried on numerous occasions to find a sustainable voting formula. It’s been dogged by allegations of political or neighbourly voting, especially since the introduction of televoting.
In Malmo, organisers decided to open the televoting before a note was sung, which initially I thought was ridiculous. However, televoting early brings in much-needed cash, so in this sense, there is a good business case, so we’ll give them that one. But just as many criticised the jury votes this year, I felt the televoting was worse.
Ukraine has seen millions of its citizens dispersed to other European countries due to the war with Russia. Indeed, a neighbour of mine had a young couple living with her until they found their own accommodation in Aberdeen. No matter the song, Ukrainians will vote in their droves for their own country, and this has been borne out in the last three contests since Russia invaded.
As for Israel? Let’s all be reminded of how this Gaza crisis started when Hamas terrorists attacked southern Israel on October 7, 2023. No matter their reasons, innocent Israeli hostages were taken, and some were just enjoying a music festival. The images were truly horrific.
But since the Israeli Defense Force invaded Gaza, innocent Palestinian lives have also been taken tenfold.
When the bully becomes the bully, there has to be some restraint at some point, and that isn’t looking very forthcoming.
Eurovision artists like Olly Alexander only asked for peace in Gaza along with the release of the Israeli hostages. However, some people of Jewish origin can’t validate or accept anybody who shows an ounce of sympathy for Palestinians and a humanitarian crisis that worsens every day.
That doesn’t make them anti-Jewish, by the way, nor does it mean they hate Israelis; after all, Israel didn’t start the conflict. It means they’re at odds with politics alien to their own beliefs, and in a democratic society, those opinions are valid. On the other end of the spectrum, the conflict has galvanized Jews from all corners of the world.
The Israeli entrant, Eden Golan, is only 20 years old, and in Malmo, she acted with a composure that belied her age. The disheartening booing and jeering that she received was not at her but at her country’s politicians. Her stoicism, though, formed the basis of a driving force to get Jews to not only unite behind her but rise up to defend the Israeli state. This then brought conflict to other artists, and so the water was already boiling when all delegations clashed together in Malmo.
I was told, and I can’t find confirmation of this, that there was a huge advertisement in New York Times Square to vote for Eden’s entry, but there was already a systematic campaign across social media to get votes for Israel, and the song didn’t even matter. Politics mattered!
And this is where the waters become very muddied and dirty.
Stephen Pollard from The Jewish Chronicle, which is a London-based newspaper, wrote after the contest:
‘Others are better qualified than me to comment on the actual competition. To be honest, I couldn’t care less about the music or the winner. Not my kind of music. But I – and, I’m sure, you, too – was forced by the bigots’ behaviour to care deeply about the context of the competition, and the voting. And what a joy it proved to be.
Because when the haters chose to turn Eurovision into their proxy, they made a fundamental mistake. Like bigots and racists throughout history, they assumed that the rest of the world – or, in this case, Europe – shared their bigotry and their hatred of Jews. Well, they don’t’.
He’s talking about antisemitism, which is a completely different argument. He wasn’t the only one, though.
Eylon Levy, who has 246,000 followers on Instagram, created a video urging Jews to vote for Israel. Levy was a former Israeli government spokesman and international media advisor to the President of Israel. Watch this video and see how his narrative is clearly antagonistic and combative.
Firstly, antisemitism is a pretty strong word to throw around and one that would get the heckles up with many individuals.
“Antisemitism is a certain perception of Jews, which may be expressed as hatred toward Jews. Rhetorical and physical manifestations of antisemitism are directed toward Jewish or non-Jewish individuals and/or their property, toward Jewish community institutions and religious facilities.” - International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance
I have Jewish friends. I may have friends who are Jewish and I don’t even know they are! I couldn’t care less if they were. However, there’s a big difference between criticising a country’s politics and a country’s religion. Every man, woman, and child has the divine right to live in peace, whatever their skin colour, religious beliefs, or sexuality.
Levy’s rant spins the whole argument with Israel on its head, moving the Eurovision Song Contest into the very political waters it tries hard to avoid. Should his actions go unpunished? Should campaigns like his see the competing country sanctioned?
But then comes the next contentious issue, for me, with the televoting this year. Each voter could vote 20 times!! Isn’t one vote enough to keep things fair? Or is money talking here also? Twenty votes per person is ridiculous! It meant our young couple from Ukraine could send 40 votes from Aberdeen, which went into the UK pool. A Jewish family of four, for example, could also send in 80 points to Israel! It’s no wonder both of these countries sucked up so many points.
To prove my case, take a look at some of the replies Levy got on his Instagram:
These people can vote for who they want because they have the right to choose what they want to do and say, just as others have the right to have differing opinions!
Croatia rightfully won the televote. It was a big fan favourite and was big in the arena. The sad thing is that all those diaspora votes for Ukraine and Israel probably prevented Baby Lasagna from winning the contest outright.
On Reddit, some fans voiced their own opinions about diaspora voting:
The fault of this year’s televoting is down to everybody. Artists like Bambie Thug, Saba, Joost Klein, and Olly Alexander were already ‘targets’ for some of the antagonistic Israeli delegation before the contest had even started. However, the booing for Eden just made things worse and hardened Jewish resolve. Eurovision this year saw the ugly side of human society.
But sticking to televoting. Never again should the semi-finals be decided solely on televotes. I was amazed that Denmark and Belgium didn’t make the final with two classy songs, but there was no chance for them this year. So how do you control this diaspora voting? I don’t think you can, but there are ways to balance things out. And we start with juries.
THE JURY VOTE
The juries are far too small. And to be honest, I wouldn’t say they’re all made up of music professionals. Louise Redknapp fronted the UK jury. Her claim to fame was being the quiet one in the late 90s girl group Eternal. She hasn’t done much since, and she took her name from former Liverpool footballer Jamie Redknapp. I wouldn’t say she’s befitting of being a worthy judge of music as well as offering the technical critique you’d expect from a music professional.
The jury vote needs to be expanded to more people, and the answer is simple: Eurovision fans.
GET OGAE INVOLVED
I think it’s time that fans of the contest have more of a say. Some of them spend fortunes flying the flag of their country (well, they used to) at the contest, wherever it’s being held. Some start saving a year in advance, so it’s not unfair to at least involve them more, the way some football clubs do with their fans.
The fan vote would be added to the jury vote, and if a country doesn’t have a group, like OGAE (Organisation Générale des Amateurs de l'Eurovision), then so be it. It’s a bit like San Marino, who can’t televote, so their votes are just made up of their jury vote. I’d like to think that combined, the result will be more true and reflective of each entry. It might even give smaller countries like the aforementioned San Marino a chance. They’re threatening to withdraw in 2025, and who’d blame them? They try year after year but have only enjoyed the Grand Final 3 times out of 14 attempts.
Coincidentally, the country that won the OGAE vote this year was Croatia, closely followed by Italy. Here is the Top 10 as decided by OGAE clubs:
Croatia: 356 points
Italy: 338 points
Switzerland: 290 points
Belgium: 223 points
France: 188 points
Ukraine: 150 points
Austria: 129 points
Lithuania: 108 points
Spain: 103 points
Netherlands: 96 points
Belgium and the Netherlands didn’t make the Grand Final, so their points would not count, except in the semi-finals. The OGAE results would not be revealed until after the contest ended, instead of before, as is tradition.
TIME FOR YOUTUBE AND SPOTIFY
Streaming has changed the pop charts, and it can change Eurovision too. It’s time YouTube and Spotify played a more active role in deciding the eventual contest winner.
IN CONCLUSION
So, for the semi-finals, a jury and fan vote combined could be used as well as a televote, but I’d say that it would need to be 60% jury vote and 40% televote.
For the final, a jury, fan, and streaming vote could be combined as well as the normal televote, but again, 60% jury and only 40% televote.
The 50-50 ratio is creating absurd votes. The EBU has to recognise that this is an artist’s career and lengthy hard work that’s being judged, and political motives are ruining their ambitions as well as ruining the whole Contest.
If they sit and allow this maelstrom to pass by and return next year with no changes, then the contest will only have a repeat of Malmo 2024, and ultimately, in the distance, a death knell will be heard.
It’s time to shake everything and remove the dust and grime that have built up over the last few years. We need fairness, respectability, and a level playing field to become prerequisites for a Contest that celebrates its 70th edition in 2026. It was founded to bring countries together in peace, but sometimes politics are too raw to be ignored, and perhaps there needs to be more awareness and understanding of human feelings as well as the safety of visiting delegations and audiences. Without that, then goodness knows what horrors await.
© Thomas Ferguson 2024