Was Eurovision Song Contest 2023 Rigged for Sweden?
Vložit
- čas přidán 2. 06. 2024
- I don’t know about you, but I thoroughly enjoyed this year’s Eurovision. My favourite song did not win, but I cannot say that the right song and performance didn’t win. That being said, many people seem to be displeased with this year’s winner, saying that her win was too obvious and that the competition wasn’t exciting enough. I don’t agree with the latter, but I do think that Loreen’s win was a little too obvious, and even advertised in a way. That’s why I am coming at you with this conspiracy theory that I have about this year’s competition maybe having been rigged for Sweden. What I am going to say is complete speculation, and in no way takes away from Loreen’s win, of course. She IS the queen of Eurovision, and queen stays queen…
Chapters:
00:00 - Was ESC 2023 rigged for Sweeden? (Intro)
01:08 - Pre-Competition Hype
02:07 - New System to Benefit Sweden?
05:19 - Sweden Wins for 50 years of ABBA's "Waterloo"
06:50 - Fan Outrage (Outro) - Hudba
I found it funny how Loreen for second time won when second place was an unusual party song and also both times Pasha Parfeni represented Moldova
Hahaahah😂😂😂 I looooved Babushki back then (maybe someone might judge my music taste, but I don’t care). And Pasha is just an amazing artist and performer
And look, first, she participated in Melodiefestivalen, didn't qualify for the final, 2nd time, she went to the final, and won Eurovision.
Next, in 2017, she didn't qualify for the final, but she did in 2023 and won Eurovision again. She was on stage on a stage kind of thing, but in 2012 you can't call that platform a box. Both times long hair and great choreography. Obviously, there are many similarities, but you cannot deny that the two songs are different, not the genre, but the song.
Maybe Loreen is the ESC Beeteljuice and will only participate in Eurovision when Pasha Parfeni is there?
Songs that came second were also both sung in Uralic languages (Udmurt and Finnish), which is weird considering it is not a big language family
@@marsukarhu9477 you made me laugh at the concept of the head of the Swedish tv chanting her name infront of a mirror and she just appears
I'm not sure if it was rigged but this Eurovision shows how much the voting system and Eurovision rules should change.
I don't think the jury should be abolished but there are some many things that have to change in the competition.
no couse Poland got 81 points while Austria 16 points, countries with diaspora would have even more advantage
I think there might be a guideline for the juries on what to 'grade' so to speak. But currently, as there are no criteria for giving points it's really subjective. If I would be a juror I might give points for different things, and I would appreciate different musical artistical stuff than you would do perhaps. So, I think if they would bring in a level of objectivity would perhaps remedy it. Like staging, but the first issue, I view and interpret a performance differently than you do, and this would lead to subjectivity again.
Ok I am really tired of people accusing Polish diaspora everytime we receive some points from the public. If this was the case we would receive more less the same number of votes every year and it doesn't happen somehow. Majority of Polish people including those that live abroad, couldn't care less about Eurovision.
@@kinquetaBro im from Poland and literally most points we recive from Online Voting are from countries where Poles lives
@@ZoPoj alright. Explain to me then why it doesn't happen every year. We should be killing it every time in televoting.
My dad is your typical "final only" eurovision viewer, never heard the songs before, votes for what he likes and doesn't care about any background info about the artists. Ever since I moved out he calls me the morning after to talk about it, and what he opened with this year was: "So that jury was rigged, huh?"
He thought Finland was fun but not his cup of tea and thought Sweden was boring. But he was angry that televote meant nothing, and that the clear crowd favorite came second only because of the jury. He said this year's results were the most disappointing he'd ever seen (and there are a lot of past winners he disliked for the record), and that the jury should be removed because they suck the fun out of the competition.
I explained the conspiracy theory to my dad, and he just went "well, that explains it". And honestly, I think it should really tell you something if causal viewers can tell something is fishy, even when they don't have any context behind it.
Yeah, that summarises it all pretty well!
Well you’re an idiot if you believe that cause abba already said they won’t be there lol
Crowd favorite yet tattoo performs obviously much much better in the charts throughout whole Europe
@@Anthony_Gx Well Loreen has an already existing following and was advertised quite a lot where as kaarija is fairly new to the scene and most of the advertisement was from fans and inside of eurovision community. That could explain the difference in charts. And looking at the charts now is kinda not fair because most people search eurovision winner not second place.
I also didn’t have any context about any performer.
I was with my little sis when we saw Loreen performing, i thought the same thing as your dad, the other performers just have better voices, choreographies and charm, i don’t understand how something so banal won
I personally love the situations where there are at least 4-5 potential winners. A contest where no one actually knows who could win. I also love it when there is a country that surprises everyone by getting so many points like North Macedonia in 2019.
North Macedonia would have *won* if it were only up to the juries. So what's this nonsense they're biased or it's some rigged fix??
Yeah, me too! And I'd prefer NO ODDS at all too. I hate that they go through the odds all the time, that really effects how people see, hear and think of the entries.
Agreed. That's why I still think we need the jury. The jury usually don't vote in favor of the odds. This year they did. But it gives a surprise element to the contest. This year, had there been no jury, Finland would have had like 60% in the odds.
I'm from North Macedonia and the song didn't deserve that many points...
i dont care much for which song was better, i just think that no matter the quality, its unacceptable to have an entry get so many jury points that its virtually impossible for someone else to catch up via televote. we've had jury winners who didnt win televote before too, but never such a large discrepancy. jury handpicked a winner and some 190 people outnumbered the millions of voters at home. makes me feel robbed as a viewer. not to mention this is the second time in less then a decade that sweden won this way (il volo won 2015 with a record televote at the time), it just wasnt this obvious to viewers because the points were announced differently so we didnt know.
Exactly!
The gap between Ukraine and 2nd place in televoting last year was around 200 points. Both sides can contribute to unfair results. (Also Loreen placed 2nd in televoting, she deserves the win, whether we like it or not)
It wasn't impossible for people to catch up to Loreen. The fact that she also scored second in Televotes made her win. If no one voted for her than she would've just had the jury votes which is not enough to win. People complain that the jury destroys the publics favorite but do you know how many times the public destroyed the jury favorite? For every "jury sponsored" winner there are Five "what the hell did people vote for, this is a song contest" winner. The public is here to show is has good and bad taste and the jury is here to make the show credible. Remember Eurovision before the jury in the late 2000s? That was a fever dream those songs were something else...
@xander x
There is no ”public destroys the jury favorite”… nobody gives a shit what the so called ”professionals” think when half the time their decision is based on politics and other bs. It is people who watch the competition and pay for voting, there is 0 reason for the jury to have as much weight in the voting as it has now.
Käärijä got over 100 points more from people paying to vote, and the stadion was chanting Käärijä’s song throughout the jury points and winner reveal. It is an absolute joke that despite all that the Jury saved Loreen. And it is made worse when you realize the jury’s history of being influenced by outside things; there is a high possibility that the Jury wanted the competition to be held in Sweden next year for the 50 year anniversary of Abba’s victory, one of the biggest winners in Eurovision history and thus a big influencer to the shows reputation throughout the years. Laughable
@@grydon6422Remember last year? Didn't Ukraine get like 432 points from the televote?
Juries should remain but changed.
5 people "with musical knowledge" isn't enough. Their biases are too obvious, they prefer manufactured pop songs and disregard the artistic ones. They reinforce the audience's political and neighbouring voting instead of balancing it with unbiased professionalism. They were introduced to fight stupid, neighbouring and block voting but they do the latter two things instead.
No, that’s the excuse that they told you. The jury’s were not added to stop voting blocs, they were added to stop *Eastern European* voting blocs. The EBU is super discriminatory towards the East
Yes. They need more diversity with their jury pool. It feels like the jurors are just a bunch of American boomers. I'm not mad with their choices because for a jury winner Loreen is still great, the entry was still very high quality but it's about time we see some diversity to give everyone a chance.
@@user-ux2kk5vp7m I agree. If France gives 12 points to Spain that is fine. If Serbia gives 12 points to Croatia that is political/block/neighbour voting.
One thing that truly kills me is how the juries treated Blanca Paloma. Eaea is THE exact type of entry people argue is the juries' job to elevate, but it was ignored for the most part.
Another thing that really sucks is that while I absolutely condemn any personal attacks on Loreen, I see many people take the enlightened centrist approach, that Loreen fans and Käärijä fans are equally immaturily whining. The attacks on Loreen or Sweden coming from a Finnish direction are exclusively internet randos with maybe 2 followers. Meanwhile, vice versa is a very different beast. Sweden is coping hard that Tattoo got no televote score from Finland. And I don't know about you, but I have a lower tolerance for sore winners than I do sore losers. It's infecting the entire media machine. Journalists asking Loreen probing questions to get condemnation of the crowd's chanting for Käärijä, "Eurovision experts" on podcasts hosted by major newspapers making borderline xenophobic comments directed at the Finnish public for giving Germany more points, as if it comes as a shock that Finns like hard rock, and most glaringly, one major newspaper calling Finland "the kingdom's former eastern half". I don't know what is posessing Swedes to bring up our colonial history unprompted as if it's something to be proud over
Sweden should be careful on how they speak about Finland being part of their former kingdom lol, the finnish army could occupy the entirety of Sweden overnight, just saying.
Yeah this whole thing is turning out to be a PR catastrophe for Sweden. From the certainty of the Swedish win before the show, accusations of copying the song, special treatment in the performance (a break before and after Sweden because they demanded a set nobody else would get), the final advertising Sweden and Abba (WHY??), the crowd getting frustrated at the results, to now these absolutely terrible articles in the press - none of this is in favour of Sweden's reputation in Eurovision. The general opinion is really turning against all this...
Next year when we'll be in Sweden celebrating Abba's anniversary, I'll be thinking that we should be in Helsinki celebrating the joy that Kääriah and his team had given us. This jury vote, acting clearly as one-man to neutralize pples massive vote has done a lot of harm guys, reminding us that business is more powerful than art itself, that pples democracy and rights are nothing than a mirage, also in Eurovision!! 😢 Yes the tears of Kãäriah on Saturday and his 8:01 genuine bitternes for feeling that he'd disappoibted his country, his fans & millions of friends did a lot of harm: this Eurovision wón't be (sadly) forgotten.
@@FrostAndTheForest Sweden takes the world for a foul, they get what they deserve. Also Loreen. What is the idea behind wanting to win twice? It is very arrogant to me.
Let's assume this was all unintentional... okay sorry, it can't be. Too much facts! The plan was: we need to win for ABBA. Is it corrupt? Hopefully not. But it is setup for sure, with the help of the EBU!
They now released a video from Käärijä on the EBU official channel, it is about nothing, just showing shots of his journey to be robbed. It is like they are doing damage control at EBU. They surely didn't expect this, not in Sweden and also not at EBU. Good lesson for them!
Be about 200% sure they will announce a change in jury voting for next year to do further damage control. We are all too naive thinking they care about us. This has nothing to do with uniting Europe, nor about songs, it is purely a marketing machine.
@@Settiis If that's the case, Finland should hurry before Sweden joins NATO. Otherwise half the Finland will be forced to defend Sweden from the other half of Finland. :D
I don't think it was rigged per se, but I think that all this hype around her put some pressure on jury. Would someone really put her lower than top-5 without fear of being seen as incompetent? Peer pressure is a thing. Also, and this is entirely speculative, I believe that if there was some disagreement between jurors, Loreen is a safe choice, because she was already very well recieved. Also also, Austria, a very strong contestant for televote suffered from being first, which potentially could have moved some televote points in that direction. So all together it could have affected the point difference.
Someone always needs to go first, and it is better to go in the last 6 indeed. Our country also suffered greatly, and 2 persons I know who tried to vote for her from abroad got error messages when trying to vote for her. I would be interested to know if there were more.
Eurovision is not the X - factor or POP idol its not discover a talent show it’s not just a public family entertainment vote . People are just sore losers so ur favourite didn’t win so it’s rigged ?? I have many favourites in the past not win it’s a competition after all. It’s quite political the public and judge jury vote any how . ❤I loved Loreen and the song she is actually a great singer a performer 🤷🏽♀️ even though I cud see she was exhausted … let’s stop being bitter & sore loser’s there’s next year 😅
@@cocohitchman3209 exactly, it is not a competition about singers, so why the jury, that is composed of pop-industry professionals, has so much power to decide the winner? Why did they flop Eaea? Isn't it the kind of song they should support - folkish, but kinda modern, visually pleasing, in native language, with strong vocals, and definetly with lower block voting than Nordic countries? Cha cha cha would need to get almost the same result from televote as Stefania last year in order to win, and we can all accept that their score was affected by solidarity votes, even though they definetly deserved to win on their own. This is what people are mad about - our opinion did not matter, and in this case non-pop songs did not stand a chance. Historically, winning non-pop songs were elevated because of televote, and top-5 of jury votes were pretty close to each other, so it was possible. This year there was a crazy gap of more than 150 points! So my point is - people are not being sore losers, people are talking about badly set up system, which became extremely clear this year, but was problematic for ages.
@@rememberme6356 it’s too much over a Eurovision Song Contest people have a right to their feelings. My favourite one this year. Other years it’s been someone else’s is favourite the score system well not make sense to the public a lot of the votes are quite political as well public and jury.
@@cocohitchman3209 you do not hear what I am saying. So let me just ask you not to call people sore losers, and end it with that
I wouldn't say it is some conspiracy or rigging, but there is a lot of bias that is more subtle, but also not at all hidden. it doesn't involve money/practical favors, I don't think, but it does involve peer pressure, and cultural and political capital.
For example, it was inappropriate for them to bring out the whole Sweden-Ireland rivalry in the number of wins at the beginning of the show. The score has been the same since 2015, and they only brought it up this year, when they already knew Sweden won the jury vote, and Ireland wasn't even in the final to defend their title as the most successful country. In addition to the whole Abba thing, there was really no need to put that idea of, oh, wouldn't it be cool if sweden hosted on the 50th abba anniversary and also challenge the johnny logan individual record, in the audience's heads?
Not saying that's what changes the final outcome drastically, but the EBU shouldn't do this for fair play reasons, especially when there is a returning beloved winner who already has a large advantage with the audience in what is essentially a popularity contest.
completely true, that was bad. But we have to remember that the ebu is a business and having the contest in Sweden for the anniversary is surely gonna be good for them.
The jury vote and system is flawed from the start. The fact that the jury is only composed by pop professional... Says a lot. Look at Germany. They slayed this year and yet end up last. It's just so wrong
You gotta like that type of music. If 1 out of 5 likes it, it won't get many points.
Also, we don't know what happened during the jury performance.
The only thing that surprising me was that the Finnish jury gave Germany 0 points.
Also, the German performance kinda sucked. At least for television voters. Pretty static. There's not a lot going on.
I saw them perform live once, and it was dope l, but on TV, it's kinda dull.
Also, with Finnland, Australia, and Slovenia, there have been 3 songs that have been better.
1 last thing. The vocals were kinda dull as well. Just in a comparison, in the german national final, it sounded way better than in the esc semi and esc final.
But I read that several artists had problems with the sound.
That was a horrible song tho
To OP.
I don't know if you have realized this or not by the televoters *didn't vote for Germany either* . Germany was *third last* from the televoters alone.
But you decided to scapegoat the juries for this as well.
Listen. Even if the juries had given Germany instead of Sweden the same number of points Germany *still* wouldn't win. Get it? Had they received 340 points from the juries but just 15 points from the televoters Germany would have 355 points. And they would have finished 4th.
"The fact that the jury is only composed by pop professional... " *Source please* . No source? Just what you heard from somebody who heard it from somebody? Well, you're a chimp then. But your in good company judging by the chimpy comments found here.
@@olivergoebel9000 yes, we know what happened.There are plenty of reports. And the point is that the jury isn't supposed to judge based on taste, otherwise what the heck is the point of them? They have a set of 4 judging criteria and should judge each song on its own merit and against the genre it represents.
@@olivergoebel9000they shouldn't vote based on genre they like. They should be professionals about and stick to the criteria. Obviously they didn't and they seem to never do.
I do agree with the "they made sure the 50th anniversary of ABBA's victory will be celebrated in Sweden " theory ! The appearance of one of the members of the band during the show make me believe in that theory even more.
Abba won't be present at esc 2024 so I still doubt this theory, the juries overrated Loreen and the public overrates Käärijä therefore most artists got thrown under the bus and I think those other artists deserved much more love in the votings, both in public and with juries. However it was gonna be between Loreen and Käärijä anyway and everyone knew that, people understood the rules beforehand and knew Tattoo would be in the taste of juries so why the pikachu reaction here? Loreen won thanks to her public votes being enough for the win.
@@lemonsunshines601 how do you know ABBA won't be present ? Did they announce it officially ? I searched for it but couldn't find anything.
What's a "Pikachu reaction" ?
@@NiniFromParispeople have been talking about it so much that their spokesperson has made a statement that they will not be reuniting at the ESC next year.
There is no way so many juries would have got on board with something so trivial. In the 90s the Maltese jury would go around trying to exchange votes. The most they got was 6 or 7 countries and other juries snitched on them.
Abba's spokesperson announced that there is no plan for ABBA to appear in 2024....
I don't know but the results upset A LOT of people. It must have took a lot of televotes to get those 12 points for Finland especially from the bigger countries. Imagine if Ukraine or Italy had not won due to not being juries favorite. Italy was 4th in the jury vote in 2021 yet Måneskin has been the biggest phenomenon to come from Eurovision in ages
The format is rigged. The jury knew Loreen was great already, so they would find excuses for any imperfection in her performance, whereas any imperfection coming from other artists would be perceived as fundamental flaws. It's just a stupid format to pitch new and relatively unknown artists against a chart topping veteran.
So that's why Bonnie Tyler placed 19th in Eurovision 2013!
It's clear that everyone favoured the singer of "Total Eclipse of the Heart" and "Holding out for an hero" over a 20-year-old Danish singer releasing her debut album.
It's all clear now, because that's how it went!
@@ricp7116 you can't point to one example and say: "See, it does not happen all the time, so this must absolutely not be a thing!" Confirmation bias is a well-documented phenomenon
@@ricp7116 same about alexander rybak in 2018
@@ricp7116 Ah yes, I remember 2013, when Bonnie Tyler was at the peak of her popularity, and everyone knew her name, and nobody had to say "she sang Total Eclipse of the Heart" to their children to a blank look of faint recognition.
Uhm, 2012, UK sent a huge artist, and they killed his career, he was last. Or that's not relevant?
in my opinion I think tattoo wouldn’t have won if Loreen wasn’t the singer. I like the song and find it very powerful but I just don’t think the hype would have been as big if the goddess that is Loreen wasn’t the one performing it, it it was some new artist it probably would have only been somewhere around the top 10.
This actually seems to be quite common at eurovision, having a previously loved competitor come back is usually quite successful. Norways entry for 2018 was hot garbage but because it was Rybak performing the result ended up being quite okay (he even won the semi final for god sake). That being said the strategy can backfire (ie. Israel 2011)
hot garbage is right. on my list of the all time worst entries in the final.
I think you are right about the song not winning if it wasnt Loreen. But i dont think that her previous performance which was more that 11 years ago, played any relevant role in the result.
Do you think cha cha cha would have won with another singer?
Stefania wouldn't have won if Ukraine didn't send it, so what's the point? 😅
@@helenesvahngarreau8637 I think Käärijä was great, I don't know anyone who could have done it better.
It wasn't necessarily rigged, but a few things affected it:
1. The juries preference for safe list/radio pop.
2. Sweden overengineering their songs to fit juries because of their huge music industry and influence in both Eurovision and abroad.
3. Removing the juries from the semi-finals brings more crowd favorites to compete for votes over "jury pets".
Tattoo sounded like it was cooked in a laboratory, which I am 100% sure it was. Sweden WANTED to win so they asked Loreen to perform the most generic but "pop" stuff they could produce, and Finland was a wrench in the works. I'm sure there was some thinking among the juries about what is "safe" to produce, and some obviously wanted Sweden to win for the anniversary, but it's more that specifically Sweden WANTED to win, and they made absolutely sure that they would win.
My theory too, had Finland not brought such a fan favorite, there would have been a fairer competition, with Sweden still VERY NATURALLY winning both jury vote and televote with a mote natural gap between "Tattoo" and the second and third acts, whatever they would have been (Israel and Italy, most likely). Juries would have been free to vote however they wanted, and would have naturally chosen Sweden because, well, it IS a good song and the kind of song juries and public like. No one would have been mad. It would have been truly serendipitous to have Sweden match Ireland's seven wins, and getting to host for ABBA's 50th anniversary; even if it was the plan, it would have been natural.
Unfortunately, "Cha Cha Cha" was there and it was threatening the plans for the perfect Eurovision with its massive fan support and thus a likely record breaking televote, so juries felt the pressure to assure Sweden would win anyway, and made it TOO obvious. They pushed their luck, and very soon people started whispering about a conspiracy: who in other years would have been declared deluded nutjobs are now people who have a very good point.
I don't think juries were bribed nor had other kinds of incentives. I don't think Sweden threatened anything nor said anything except "hey, we could be breaking a few records if we were to win, that would be nice...".
I think the juries didn't want to lose the opportunity for the best Eurovision ever.
... man, it would be funny if Finland wins the Eurovision that supposedly celebrates Sweden's greatest musical accomplishments.
Imo, her win was planned with the factors you mentioned. It’s wasn’t rigged, their strategy works.
But still… I didn’t like how the producers showed this ABBA interview and the winning board with the counties with the most wins
2021 remains one of the best years in Eurovision, mostly because there were so many potential winners. There was no jury “favorite” and everyone had a fighting chance till the last public votes were given.
This year was a hot mess. The obvious favoritism made it nearly unwatchable and I feel like this year’s events will effect people’s trust in the integrity of the competition in the years to come.
I always loved Loreen as an artist she is creative, good singer, good performer HOWEVER this whole thing seems really staged and planned ngl. Im not a fan of that Cha cha cha song its not my cup of tea but this year i wanted to be surprised by the winner. 2 years in a row we already knew who is gonna win, first Ukraine now Sweden? I mean i didn't have a favorite song this year and my country is not in the contest but all the artist who participeted this year must be felling like shit. They were amazing but they didn't get any 12 points from ANY of the juries ?? It is not realistic. I know that Loreen is amazing but this "victory" will be a shadow on her carier forever. Maybe not for the people of sweden or her die hard fans but for rest of the people she will be that privileged woman who won the contest for ABBA show or something.
Staged? Come on, the song is incredibly popular. The most streamed Eurovision winter already. Is that staged also you mean?
@@kwunder123 Thats what i mean that song is popular because Loreen is popular. She is already a huge popstar ex Eurovision winner she left a mark in eurovision history and this is not even her best song in my opinion.( see, we can even judge her discography not just this particular song because we KNOW her.) Her stage show was the BEST (for TV of course) however whenever i wanna watch her performance i watch national final version of it not the semi or grand final one. In the contest she was not her best. Like i said I love her as an artist and i listen to her songs. But this year all contest became Sweden vs Finland. Like any other countries doesn't even exist. And all the other performers deserved some jury points not like 5 or 6 points... There were great vocal performances like Spain, Estonia, Lithuania, Switzerland etc. But Sweden getting most of the 12 points makes us think like something is going on and all this Abba museum commercial ?? Respectfully, i have no idea who sould've won but this victory doesn't seem like a fair one. Im just sorry for all the other artists who performed that night they didn't have a chance you can't compete someone who already done this before and has a huge support by all means.
@@JPTR9 then how do you explain the incredible hype and success of the Finnish entry sung in Finnish by a totally unknown artist. Was that also pre-staged? And why did England finish almost last when they arranged and are also major financier of esc. The simple answer is that it’s not a conspiracy. Enjoy the music and chill 😎
@@kwunder123 Well it didn't win end of the day right? Thats what im saying. But you're right about the chill and enjoy the music part im definitly doing that. ✌
I agree with you. Have you heard the voice of our candidate (France), seen her performance, etc ? And she got such bad points from the juries ? Come on ! I am simply SHOCKED ! I knew Sweden and Finland would come 1 and 2, no problem. But that France got such dreadful points is too unreal... I know someone who was AT Eurovision that night, he said France got the 2nd biggest reaction from the public. I also know 2 persons abroad who tried to vote for France and who couldn't as they got an error message. Something was very fishy this year ! Granted it was a year with many good songs, but still.... there are voice experts in those juries... and nobody gave a good score to La Zarra for France ?
For me, even if it wasn't rigged, it showed how unneeded the jury is for the competition. It's frustrating that they make you pay for voting, and then those votes doesn't even matter. I think many people feel rightfully angered at the organisation because it genuinely made us feel scammed. Tbh, Loreen's Tattoo was one of my favorite songs from the contest, so i wasn't mad she won. But it angered me to see the results and see that our votes don't matter at all. For me moving forward they either have to get rid of the Jury or make the public vote free. Even if it's cheap, you can' make people pay to vote and then disregard completely what the majority wants.
Feeling scammed is the perfect way to describe it. They barely even went through the televotes, spending 90% of their time on jury votes. Felt like a "Thx for cash now fk off"
@@PatrikRasch Bruh have you never watched Eurovision, that's literally how it works
Only televote does matter, for the placement of everyone in the list, and yes, also this year for the potential winner. If Loreen got the placement in the televote that Israel had, which was a great act and scored fifth place in the televote, she would’ve ended up a few points beneath Finland. And of course if Finland scored even more points, it would’ve been an even tighter finish. Only Loreen came second in the televote, with considerably more points than nr. 3. This is just how Eurovision winners are selected and have been for a good while now. It isn’t purely a popularity contest. Sure, it could be, but it isn’t. The way it is right now is that it’s a 50/50 combination of the jury result and the televote. To say that the televotes don’t matter, even in this situation, is simply not true. If you want a clear example of how televotes and the peoples voices matter, take a look at last years results. Why is it a problem when the jury’s nr.1 ends up winning but fine when it’s the televotes? When more often than not that’s just not gonna be the same act.
It’s actually pretty expensive to vote in a lot of countries, highest is Estonia where it’s 1.70 Euro. I’m in the U.K. and it’s 15 pence per vote, Denmark has the cheapest but in Finland it’s 1 Euro per vote so I’m not surprised they didn’t spend that voting on their biggest rival! There’s a table available of voting costs and it actually shocked me how expensive it is in some countries. But you are absolutely correct, taking any amount of money then ignoring the overwhelming public favourite is going to make people very angry.
@@IAreWhoIArr You can keep saying that, but it's not factual. If the jury basically blocks others from ever being able to reach even close to the top, so yeah, it is fraudulent.
People keep saying that "yeah, but Finland was 4th after jury points and that's good", but the placement doesnt matter, the points do. In a normal year the difference between the top3, top4 is around 50 points, not 200!! Head start of 200 points is a death blow. Makes you think that it was orchestrated, especially when the song was just a basic pop song and not anything special,
Though I do not believe that the contest was rigged from the start, I do think it shows why the jury needs to be abolished or at least the televote/jury split should be along the lines of 70/30 and not 50/50.
The reason they were brought back was bogus in the first place. People were complaining about "bloc voting" in eastern europe which is hypocritical (the same thing happens with the nordic countries, greece and cyprus etc.) and dumb (the juries also do that and during the time were eastern european countries participated and there was no jury, they didn't dominate eurovision and the "bloc voting" was not to the same the degree in eastern europe as was in Scandinavia and Greece.)
And like you said, 5 people have a much more impactful bias as 100 000s and can potentially be bribed.
No the jury vote must stay, it's what gives artists the more professional recognition. I think it is a good mix now, with 50/50 between the jury vote and public vote.
Block voting killed what little integrity the ESC had left. This did NOT happen during the days of only jury votes (minus perhaps Greece and Cyprus). Juries accounting for 50% saved the ESC from being a *complete joke* and just being a "living wax cabinet trying to stay relevant". The ESC can go the MTV movie awards route for all I care and allow stupid teens to vote Twilight "the best movie" for four consecutive years and Kristen Stewart(!!) "the best actress".
When you give the kids, chimps and clowns all power expect sh*t to be popular. We'd have Transformers, Twilight and the latest superhero movie win the Oscars if it were up to the "televoters".
Whatever next? People should televote for the next Nobel Prize Winners too?
"They didn't dominate Eurovision"
Every winner between 2001 and 2008 except Finland was in the East/Baltics. In 2007 not a single western European country made the top 16. But go off
@@morbidsearch 2003 was turkey and 2005 was greece, neither of them was in the former eastern bloc, that would make 5/8, barely making a majority is not dominating.
It was rigged. It is not possible that all jurors give Loreen first place as they did in Germany without corruption and no points to Käärijä who was wildly popular and got 12 points from televoters
"It is not possible that all jurors give Loreen first place " All "jurors" *didn't* - what are you smoking? - Sweden got 12 points from 15 countries.
*Israel* and *Italy* got 12 points from 5 countries *each* . This means that the jury groups of 10 countries gave Israel and Italy top scores each.
Belgium received 12 points from 3 countries.
Australia and Finland both received 12 points from 2 countries each. (4 in total)
Austria, Czech Republic, Estonia, Slovenia and Ukraine got 12 points each. (5 in total).
So what does this mean? It means there are 37 jury groups from all counties.
15 jury groups gave Sweden 12 points. (40% of all jury groups, not even half)
22 jury groups gave *other countries* 12 points.
"It is not possible that all jurors give Loreen first place"
Do you even understand how the system works??
Clearly not, so start by getting that right first before you make an even bigger fool of yourself than you already are.
"as they did in Germany without corruption" Germany? *Germany??* What does Germany have to do with anything here? What's your point anyhow? Are you meaning the 1933 German general elections who made the nazis come to power? Be more specific or learn to express yourself in intelligible English.
Or are you suggesting just the *German* jury group was bribed/ordered/whatever? Suppose they were? HOW does that ALSO apply for ALL the other jury groups? Are you out of your mind? Are there any credible sources for the German jury groups or are just listening to urban hearsay?
"and no points to Käärijä who was wildly popular and got 12 points from televoters" Finland got 12 points from jury groups of 2 countries. The juries also awarded Finland enough points to be *4th* . So what if Germany didn't??
" It is not possible" What is also not possible is how you have a job, are of legal age and managed to pass through school. You'd better be 12. Because if you're not I pity both you and those who have to put up with you in private.
Cretin.
@@McLarenMercedes "as they did in Germany". Read before you get upset.
Jury is giving points regarding their voice, song and so on….Finland ? Voice of Celine Dion right 😂😂
@@UnscrambledEggs
Euphoria won in Azerbaijan, not Germany.
@@norbertschmidt5997 so what are u going to say about Spain or Portugal. They're voices were great and performences also and unfortunately they didn't had such points...
I don't necessarily believe that it was "Rigged" for Sweden to win but that Sweden wanted to win so did everything they could (Send their most popular winner, pre-contest hype etc.). I think the abba mentions is that for most Brits the only Eurovision artist they will know is ABBA so they need to reiterate how serious the contest is (as the British public doesn't really take eurovision seriously)
This! Thank you for this beautiful comment!
Sweden's performance is picked in a Swedish version of Eurovision though. Are you proposing they rigged that as well? My point is that Sweden didn't "send their most popular winner", she just happened to win the Swedish competition.
@@BurnBird1 Loreen was never going to lose Melodifestivalen. She had a massive lead in the odds and she ended up with over 1 million more votes than the person who came second. So yes the Swedish people did send their most popular winner. Also did you not read my first line: I don't believe it was rigged I just think that they were really trying to win.
I and most people I spoke to hadn't seen anyone mention that it was 50 years since ABBA won. Not before the final anyway!
@@jenblack98 Loreen has participated before in the melody festival with "Statement" and it did not go down well with the Swedish people. This year we loved her song and her performance, so that's why she won!
Also - there was a break before *and* after the Swedish song in both the semi final and the final. I don't think that this thing ever happened. They literally singled out the Swedish entry in both relevant shows. You could also add the fact that the executive producer is Swedish, and he too chooses the running order. Loreen is not to blame, and she just did what she does. The blame is on the EBU and the juries, and they behaved pretty fishy. Too many things are adding up to show a rigged show, and that is alarming. It's no secret that the juries usually prefer Sweden, but this year it was way too obvious. And don't forget - last year they cancelled 6 jury votes saying it was rigged, and they told nobody there and did it all behind their backs in the grand final, and also changed the votes in the semi. Who got the 12 points from all 6 disqualified country juries last year? Yap. Changed one rigged vote in another
I have been saying the same thing about the breaks around the Swedish performance. NO ONE else would get such a privilege. Absolutely no one. They would be told to change the set so that it can be build in the pre-defined number of seconds. The favouritism just shines through...
Agreed. It saddens me to think, should the conspiracy theory prove true, how will it affect Loreen. All the hate will be directed at her, when she did nothing else but focus on dedicating a big part of her last year to make the song and the performance to the top of the Eurovision standards.
If the conspiracy proves true, I'll be surprised if Loreen ever makes another song in her life. And that's an optimistic outcome.
Guys I'm sorry to ruin it for you but those breaks were to build up the walls in her performance...it wasn't because they wanted to singled it out it was because the damn thing was too difficult to put on stage. In fact I heard that initially it was going to be even bigger but the stage didn't allow it as it was too small
@@danielfraiz74 that is the point, nobody else will be give such a privilege. I can assure you if some smaller country would demand such a difficult set, they would be told to make it smaller and more simple and keep to the schedule. Sweden is a favourite in many ways, doesnt mean the competition is rigged, but they got special treatment.
@@danielfraiz74Isn't that the point? All artists should have the same amount of time to change the set. Everyone knows that. They made an exeption for her because of her giant blocks.
I don't think I can be very objective in handling this subject since I'm Finnish and was of course rooting for my own country (y'know... since we had our first actual chance at winning since 2006) but I think that there was some tomfoolery going on behind the scenes, with the whole ABBA thing and all that. However I feel like people are reaching SO hard to get Loreen cancelled or whatever, saying that the song is plagiarized, she bought her votes or whatever. A lot of Eurovision fans are seemingly using this as an opportunity to personally attack Loreen.
I saw someone on Twitter call Käärijä "the people's princess" (lol) and that's kinda accurate. The hype around him for these past few weeks in Finland has been incredible and something I've never seen before. The fact that he literally got one of the largest amounts of televote points in ESC history, second only to Ukraine 2022 is telling. If I'm being honest, I think the televoting points should have more weight than the juries (like 75/25 or something?) but I don't think that's happening any time soon.
I’m not Finnish I’m British and maybe even more angry than you are 😂 I think we put on a great show but it was ruined by Sweden and the jury. I won’t say ruined by Loreen herself, that’s not fair at all, but everything so carefully choreographed for Sweden to win for Abbavision next year and very evident jury bias. I don’t even mean that the jury didn’t give Käärijä enough points, I think some other excellent performers were robbed by the jury. France, Estonia, Portugal to name a few all had outstanding performances but no 12’s, just Sweden all the time, so wrong and so boring!
But for Käärijä to receive such overwhelming support from the paying public and still not win was just terrible, it broke my heart, I switched off immediately which was the first time ever for me even if I didn’t like the winning song in previous years. I’m giving the show a break next year unless an outsider country is the bookmakers favourite and the jury system changes. But at the moment I suspect it’s already decided that returning Luxembourg and Sweden are the favourites again. Best wishes from U.K. and congratulations for Käärijä being the people’s‘Princess’ and first song in Finnish to enter U.K. charts 🥳 He is a legend and my winner 💚🇫🇮
How many points did Loreen get from the Finnish people?
And how many streams have Loreen today in Finland?
There you have a conspiracy...
Don't believe the people always vote for the best song, not saying Loreen was the best song.
@@annag1202
The UK sent a decent song but the live vocals weren't great and the presentation was an eyesore
Last year it was visible, and now it is quite obvious. Along with all the mentioned, I think that one alliance is also important to them, in which Finland has been accepted, and Sweden is expected this year. It is not worse to push everything. It's stupid that once the points are raised, for some people, they have to be reduced for some in order for everything to pass. Also, last year the scores of several juryes, Romanian and I think Moldovan, were not recognized. Also, they didn't want hype like Konstrakta last year, so this year for Serbia they made it so that the tone was a disaster, the framing as well. They didn't even want hype about Switzerland and the Czech Republic, after all, they have songs for peace.
You nailed it. That's exactly what this charade is about. When you compare Beovizija and Eurovision framing and sound, something is incredibly fishy. You'd expect Eurovision, with its higher budget would do better, not screw up the performance. At least, not this intentionally. And I agree about Czechia and Switzerland, calling for peace does not suit the propaganda of those who profit from prolonging a war. Czechia had a brilliant song. Chest-thumping songs do well, and not that, unfortunately.
Croatia had a fierce protest song, too. I'm happy that the public rewarded them with 122 points
@@Asdsfdsf
The Eurovision let everyone voice their support for Ukraine despite shunning them for doing it for Palestine. But somehow they're still pro-Ukrainian war? Ok
Halfway through the jury voting I realized they weren't just voting for Sweden, jury were in fact building a wall. A really high wall that would be very difficult to jump. Who they were so afraid of I wondered. I mean she was really good but not outstanding like that. Soon the answer arrived.
Say that in public if you dare and observe people's reactions. Seek professional help for your paranoia.
"Who they were so afraid of I wondered" Who are "they" nutjob? Who is *afraid* of *who* ?? It's the ESC not the Russian-Ukrainian war you clown.
I'm from Sweden, and yea, I can definetely say that it was quite obvious that Loreen was gonna win. Am I happy that she won? Well, yes. What would my reaction be if Käärijä won? I would still be happy, even though it really wasn't my favourite.
This years favourite was Serbia. I keep playing it on repeat no matter the 16th place. To me yes, it was stage. Too obvious. But if it wasn’t staged, then Sweden now you know the recipe : send Loreen. Whenever Sweden wants to win - for whatever reason- send her. 12 points pour la Swede😊 juries….show the way
The winner was decided when Loreen was revealed as a participant in MF many months ago. The song wouldnt had mattered, but the master at copy/pasting, Thomas G’son, tried to remake Euphoria with the same build up and an artistic staging. We all know how juries always overrate Sweden (even Benjamin Ingrosso came 2nd in the juries with his nasal voice). As you said, next year is ABBA’s 50 year anniversary, and that also gain the viewing of Eurovision…ust saying.
ooh please eurovision would not damage there reputation, for a band that canot even be in the same room, and even if this was true, the it would have happend with other countries as well
@savagepixel
Eurovision is already damaging their reputation, why do you think this conversation is going on? Please, stop giving excuses to bs
@@grydon6422 the coversation is going on because you fav didn,t win and im the one who isn,t honest? Listen abba will not be there, they cant even be on a stage or in a interview together
but with all means stay angry, and don,t watch next year if you cant handle it
@@savagepixel4154 Truth hurts 😉 It dosnt make me angry, LOL. I just stated the facts.
One of the things I noticed during the Grand Final was that while the rest of the performers had apparently removed their mics, Loreen kept hers. I know it's more likely she just forgot in the heat of the moment, but I guess the Käärijä fanboy in me was just not having it
what do you mean the heat of the moment? you dont just forget to take off a mic, especially when you are the most experienced in the contest.
One of Ukrainian ESC bloggers talked about this mic too, as if she knew she would be singing again. And he wanted France to win. So, you are not alone.
@@thatcatalyst Exactly. And I assume there's a tech team/ artist team that make sure it is off as well
Her body language was "I am getting this" except for brief moment when she heard how many points Kaarija won, she defo knew
@@thatcatalyst I didn't want to come off as one of those sore losers, but what your saying is true. the mic was even brought to her attention when her hair got stuck in it
Ths thing is- I voted for Finland thinking we as the audience can flip the votes like we did with Måneskin in 2021 for example. But the votes for Sweden were too high Finland beeded more points than Kalush Orchestra last year to surpass Sweden
The problem is that the gap between Sweden and other countries even Israel which was 2nd was more than 150 points so at this point it was obvious that Sweden is the winner
It wouldnt smell as fishy if the jury had swinged the vote this way to any other performer. Loreen being a comeback artist I’m going to compare her song to Euphoria, especially since tattoo was so similar, and francly, tattoo is a much weaker song that is completely devoid of soul and spirit.
The final had its fair share of pop songs and ballads and tattoo was among the weakest of them: Norway, Lithuania, even Israel and Poland had better entries imo.
Tattoo had two redeeming qualities: Loreen’s excellent voice and a high quality sound production. It is as if the swedish music-industrial complex had an AI analyze all the popularity data from the past decade and clumped together a song made up of all the right pieces, but lacking true human inspiration.
One thing I don't understand is that people seem surprised that Loreen got so many jury votes. Her performance is EXACTLY what juries usually vote for. They love artistic, powerfully delivered, pop tracks that have a big "WOW" factor. There's nothing fishy about the juries absolutely loving her performance. Käärija is EXACTLY the type of song and performance the juries usually throw further down the list because it's not an insanely powerful pop ballad, but it's still in their top 10 cause it's fun. I highly doubt the entire thing was rigged with the intent of giving Sweden the victory.
If anything needs to happen after this its a jury system rework where they account for less percentage of the points total. They should also try to diversify the juries as much as possible and have the jurors give reasons for each of their picks.
Not really. Cha Cha Cha, Serbia and Austria's songs were more original and the Jury HAVE TO rank songs with "originality" as one of the criteria. It's clear Tattoo was a snub of Euphoria and Ukraine 2011.
They could have voted for Norway or Armenia too, I think those songs fall in the same category and they were great too. But nope, all points had to go precisely to Sweden
So do you expect us to believe that 190 people voted 12 point for the same country, at the same time? What an epiphany! According to your word then, next year all countries should sent “copies” of tattoo. The judges will have a hard time distributing their 12s if “tattoo type “ songs are really what they are looking for.
The song is just not that good they try to sell it to be. 190 points more than anyone else for that particular song is the problem. It doesn't add up.
@@bg8006 Exactly! Actually Norway and Armenia were more innovative and original, BUT still very radio friendly song, but still no love. Most of the time Sweden just seems to get points for being Sweden. They just have to send a lukewarm popsong and their in top5.
loved the video the part were you mention loreen having the mic i think she just had it because most of the other performers had a hand mic
One performer had same mic but didnt have it on when he was in green room
@@kruk0perhaps the performers that are more likely to win are always kept ready to perform. They might do the same with the staging crew.
@@BM-ft2hg yeah but more than half expected that finland was gonna win/ likely gonna win and he wasnt kept ready, but he lost due to pre agreed votes
I'm not entirely sure but I think she also had it on during the whole semi final show
@@kruk0 Because Loreen's mic was attached to her outfit, she had the mic on her as well in the semi final, stop making these stupid alligations
A Mic like loreen had strapped to her face literally its hard to remove and most other countries had in hand mics so i dont get why people think that its rigged because she had a mic strapped to her face in the green room?
You’re right! It was strange that her mic was not removed. Just like they would have known she’d win. Didn’t notice that before…
I noticed it tbh, but didn’t that much of it.
If you look back at the semi-final qualification moment she didn't have her mic removed as well, i guess they didn't bother with it at all. (that's just my theory)
I read an interview with a jurer from Israel. He said that each member of the jury fills a form alone and they send it abroad for a team that counts the votes and calculates it to the treditional point system. This makes me think that the team counting down the votes could have just mess up some votes to make it seem like Sweden was the country's no.1. The Jurer even said he didn't put Sweden in his top so he had no idea that they will give her 12 points
Well she had a good, but not great song. But a pretty well received song by most (still 2nd in televoting)
Artist probably gave her more points than the average ppl. Imagine she lands a 2nd or 3rd spot for most of the jurors. That's enough to beat most of the other artists. Because she is just gonna have a high average score.
Her overall points were about 9 points per country, which is about 2nd or 3rd in average.
Finland had rather the problem that this year that there has been a lot of good songs, but slightly worse. So the points split pretty even on like 6 nations place 2-7 in jury vote all 150-170points.
Normally it's rather 3 songs around 240 points.
And also Norway performing poorly in the juries performance kinda helped Loreen there aswell.
That's why some
If that's how the voting happens everywhere....Yeah, it's not too difficult to see how easy it is to manipulate the vote.
@@marsukarhu9477 That's exactly what I'm saying
The ranking of each juror is available publicly so there's no need for speculation
As for the micm it is fixed on her cheek by a sticker, which was covered by makeup. Considering the fact that she undoubtedly was one of the favourites with big chances to performing in the end of the night as a winner, it was a wise decision to keep the mic
Yeah she and someone else, I forget who wore the mic on their cheek.
If memory serves Käärijä also had his mic on still, it’s just his was a chest mic covered by flesh coloured tape, I remember seeing it flapping around when they were announcing results because it had come unstuck
@@Cilla0415 Pasha, Moldova
Maybe it's take a lot of time to remove that mic out of her body suit? I saw a picture in her Instagram, she needs like 3 people to set that mic for her, 2 hold the extra wig, 1 set up the mic to her body suit. So i think they don't have time to take it off when she finished, just like other contestants, they just hand their mic to a staff and go straight to the green room.
Hi I just investigated the microphone theorie, but unfortunately this can be debunked, because she was still wearing her mic during the qualification process in the first semi final. So there must be another reason for her still being mic'd.
I keep saying it all years, the Jury's number of member should be higher, it should be at least 10 or 12 people all of them musicians, producers or managers of diferent genre each, giving less bias and more discution and variation beeween country to country. Also, less easy to bribe.
Or i saw on twitter someone proposing to change it to a system like Benidorm Fest from Spain Public (25 % televote y 25 % Demografic panel) and Jury (18,75 % nacional y 31,25 % internacional)
It's not rigged, just rotten system. A handful of ~180 people get to decide half of the points (5 per country)
I think that the lack of jury in the SF mesnt there was a lack of jury favourites in the GF which meant that Sweden was kinda the only jury front runner. Like the lack of jury meant a lack of jury competition which meant crazy high points. I mean Sweden had almost the double amount of jury points than Israel. With the juries in the SFs I think it might have been a bit more evenly distributed. So perhaps the lack of juries in the SFs was to the televotes disadvantages.
I wonder how many people will be singing Loreen Tattoo's song or how many discothèques would be playing this song.
Personally it's been on my playlist since the first time I heard it. I would have also liked my country to win, but Sweden was a superior song to all the others. What disgusts me if that my country came 16th, despite an incredible voice and performance. That Sweden and Finland came 1st and 2nd (in any order) is fine with me, but that France came 16th is not !
Its in the top 5 global list
The microphone is the most laughable conspiracy theory. It was just sown into her costume and couldn't just be removed. Almost everybody else had hand held mics. She has it on in the green room at the semifinal as well.
Also, I didn't hear any mention of the Abba anniversary or Sweden tying with Ireland until after her win was announced. But please, show proof too prove me wrong.
This joins 2021 as one of my favourite Eurovisions fullstop, and Käärijä not winning doesn't take away from how well he did - nor how well Loreen did.
I'm not sure I'd go as far as to believe it was rigged intentionally, but I think the collective bias of the juries wanting Sweden to host the 50th anniversary of Abba (either out of their own interests or to 'appease' the Eurovision gods) is definitely a major contributing factor. But I believe the song was always going to win. It's massive Jury Bait.
Would love to see more videos from you on Eurovision in general, loved this one and the video on In Corpore Sano.
Omg it's will Solace
This wasnt even close to 2021. 2023 was a one horse race and that horse lost. 2021 had a ton of big hitters
Keep in mind, that there also has been a certain bias against loreen in the public vote.
Well, I didn't like either of both 😅.
Sweden - yeah, great voice, but I barely understood a word.
Finland - just not my type of music.
@@olivergoebel9000 I'm not sure I fully agree. In a 'vote for your favourite' 5 people can work together to not give an artist points. 5 million cannot.
Sweden still got a lot of points from almost every nation. People voting for Finland weren't voting against Sweden.
@@olivergoebel9000 bias being...the fact that people didnt like it as much? What the fuck are you on about
I think the televoting is at least as flawed as the juries. The juries gives points to 10 countries, a televoter gives points to one or maybe two countries. This makes it very unfair for songs that are like the 5th favourite of people. And like you said block voting is a real problem. All this made 5 countries this year get high ponts froom the televote while the rest got hardly any points at all.
Now this is obviously wrong. We know that all countries gave points to Finland, and we know that all countries except Finland gave points to Sweden. Still, all other countries also received televoting points. How would that be possible, if all countries had already given all their points to Sweden and Finland? The televoting point allocation has to work the same way as the jury one, and cannot reflect absolute voting behavior, which was of course good for Sweden because if points reflected absolute votes, Finland would have gotten 70% of all audience points and won easily.
In the UK you can vote 20 times, whether you'll get through is another thing, I managed a few votes but then just got buzy tones.
I think like you. People usually vote for ONE song, their favourite. They don't do a second vote for their 2nd or 3rd favourite. I know someone who was THERE live at Eurovision, who told us France got the 2nd biggest ovation from the public, yet that didn't translate into points at all. But if people preferred Finland and liked France 2nd, and voted only once, they would vote for Finland and not France.
Maybe the public voting should change and allow to put your 3 or 5 favourites, in order of preference.
@@AlmaGCN yeah, that's why people at home have more votes to give out however they want. Many vote for a single entry exactly on e, others give their fave entry multiple votes and give a couple to another entry or a couple entries, other give their fave ALL their votes, and others equally distribute their votes of they have many favorites.
It clearly was not rigged, the facts eventually add up but people obviously chose to look past them just because the result didnt fit them.
A question. Do you think that, if the EBU suspected cheating like in last year semifinals but involving the Scandinavian countries, they do something about it? I'm not sure
there was no sign of orchestrated cheating they just voted for each other because they wanted to
Good point
Okay this might sound a bit controversial, but in the past couple of years, especially with the war going on in Ukraine, it's often the songs that don't win, but get the 2nd or 3rd place that the majority of the public will think is the "robbed" winner. The only exception the last couple of years has been Måneskin who felt like the deserving winner (Although I realy like France's performance of "Voilá" that year) I also think that the people behind Eurovision knew this, since in 2018, after a bunch of people were calling Eleni the robbed goddess of Eurovision with "Fuego", they invited her back 1 year later to perform in the song mix-up along with winners like Måns and Conchita (btw she killed that performace of Dancing Lasha Tumbai).
This bring us to this year's Eurovision. With everyone thinking Finland was going to win with "Cha cha cha". You could hear the crowd screaming it during the results of the public jury. Everyone in the arena knew that Finland was the favorite, but they didn't win in the end. Same thing happend the year prior with "SloMo".
The question if Eurovision was rigged for Sweden to win it? I will say no, but there were a lot of suspicous moments. No. 1 being the stats of which contries have won the most times. They haven't done this public before at least to my knowledge, where they showed how many wins each country has, and what do you know? Sweden was talked about tieing with Ireland for most wins. We also know that Sweden is almost every year favored by a good portion of the "professionel" jury. Which means that they're almost in the top 10 guranteed each year.
Sweden and Finland were my top 2 songs this year (along with France and Portugal), so I wasn't mad that Loreen won, and again she has the nickname "Queen of Eurovision". Also if it was rigged for Sweden to win just because "It's Loreen", I would like to remind everyone that Alexander Rybak won with "Fairytale" in 2009, but didn't get the same outcome as Loreen did, when he represented Norway again with "That's how you write a song", even though his performance of "Fairytale" is also known to be one of the best.
In conclusion: The professionel jury votes needs a change in order to balance things out a bit, in my opinion. I'm fairly okay with "Tattoo" winning, because it is a good song, and honestly Loreen was one of the few acts that actually had nice scenography. And Finland's "Cha cha cha" joins the robbed list: Cha cha cha, SloMo, Fuego, Dancing Lasha Tumbai etc.
In 2021 there were 3 countries that were neck in neck (my 3 favourites that year funny enough). I'm French, I wanted either Italy or Switzerland to win and France to come just after these two... it almost was in that order in the end.
But in 2022 it was incredibly obvious that the win was given to Ukraine because of the war... half of my family are British, they felt absolutely ROBBED of the win. But at the time there were 6 to 7 millions Ukrainians that has left Ukraine, and who therefore could vote for their own country, 20 votes each. So that too is to take into consideration.
But of course what affects the vote the most is the constant Scandinavian block voting, 5 countries always voting for each other. That's terribly unfair on other countries.
@@AlmaGCN Yet the swedish papers are now throwing shit at finland's public for not giving them points.
But sorry, feeling robbed by a MASSIVE televote seems pretty ridiculous. Especially when that particular performance was excellent on its own merit and massively amplified in terms of its emotional impact due to the war. If people didn't feel that, I'd say they need to get some empathy. Complaining about a country winning "just because of the war" is disgusting.
This kind of songs aren't liked by the eurovision establishment. They didn't even invite Chanel to sing in the final.
@@UnscrambledEggs but that's the truth... if there hadn't been the war, the UK would have won in 2022.
@@AlmaGCN
Nah, Ukraine still would have won, just not by as much. It was the type of song that took an unconventional Eurovision genre and owned it - like Lordi or Salvador.
As a swedish person, i must say i had absolutely 0 interest in Loreens entry. In sweden her type of music has become obnoxious motivational pop you hear in your cars radio. And i feel as if our country has just snagged the win of someone who were more deserving tbh. My idea of eurovision is to promote music thats building upon the art of music as a whole. Be that with an entertaining show, combinations of genres that deserve a moment in the spotlight or someone genuinely pouring their heart out for their country. I wouldn't say eurovision was rigged this year, however i do think that loreen was basically this years musical "oscar bait" and the jury simply had too much power with the new points system.
I dont know about it been rigged but I think its kinda stupid that those who pay to vote, (and there are like millions of people)Theirs opinions matters the same amount than 5 peoples on each country. so why would anyone want to put 20e to vote when you know it doesnt matter. I think 30/70 would be more equal.
The videos started great with the conspiracy on Semifinals, then it went down with Loreen's mic 🥴
A most important fact, is on how "naturally" were they commenting on Johnny Logan winning twice, from semifinals to the finals we heard it too often.
Then at the beginning of the Finals, Graham Norton brought a table of how many times countries had won Eurovision, to showcase what? Luxembourg coming back, but not without mentioning Sweden possibly matching Irelands record that night. What did it have anything to do with bringing back Luxembourg? they are 5 wins in the run, but is that the best fact on them you can have to share they are coming back? maybe a showcase of their winners, and only Luxembourg, could have been a better choice, as they did on ESC social media.
And just at the end of the performances, who is that wishing their best wishes to the performers?
is that... Bjorn from ABBA?! why is ABBA on here? Shouldnt a mention or reference to them come better timed next year at their 50th anniversary?
The show was all set to make you think of what Sweden was playing for, Loreen matching Johnny, Sweden matching Ireland, ABBA's 50 anniversary on Sweden.
there wasnt a moment where i was made to think this hard of any other country participating this year.
maybe Ukraine, but they were the champions, but just imagine that, there were more mentions to Sweden possible winning, than there were of Ukraine just being there, and Ukraine was the champion, and they were supposed to be sharing their culture to gain awareness over the fact that they are at war 😵💫
Loreen and Käärijä fan over here, supporting both, but it is to "perfect" and "overly produced" for it to be natural.
Love Loreen, but it feels like an empty victory.
no ✨
these "theories" are hilarious, especially the abba one like lmaoo come on ya'll can't be serious😭
The fact that people seriously believe that crackpipe theory makes me lose hope in humanity
I did think swefen would win months ago tho because of it so why is that when. I posted it too
Calculate the mathmatical probability that it's 50 years since ABBA next year, Sweden won AND Loreen of all people was chosen for a second time?! Plus, the Executive Supervisor of Eurovision is an SVT Swedish producer!
Im just gonna say that why Loreen didn't take of her mic was because it was stuck under her clothes
Yeah it was like a catsuit so can't be easy to take it off just like that. Also they kept bugging her with questions
I can see where people are coming from by I don’t at all agree it was staged. As far as I can see that’s an idea mostly spread around by people who don’t know the background to her participation, and just assume the Swedish broadcaster put her in with that song in order to win for ABBA’s 50th - not knowing about the whole Melodifestivalen selection process, and the fact that it was Loreen’s own choice to compete. Also, this isn’t her first attempt to come back- she entered Melodifestivalen in 2017 and didn’t come close to winning, which shows even returning winners still need good songs (look at Alexander Rybak in 2018). The song and overall performance was pretty jury bait, but a lot of winning songs are in order to maximise their chances. That’s just the way it goes. She played the game right and she won it. Also, it’s important to remember that it wasn’t just the juries who liked her - she came second in the televote, performing for a country which usually struggles to win over the public. The song is a huge hit across Europe, so it’s victory is not at all undeserved.
In terms of the odds, I don’t think it’s becoming a self-fulfilled prophecy or anything, it’s just the bookies are pretty good at predicting the winner, because that’s what they do. Admittedly it does cause a bit of over-promotion of the favoured songs and under-promotion of the ones that aren’t, but what can you do about that- the favourites are almost always the most popular ones anyway, so they’re going to get shared around regardless. After the contest people look back and claim the odds coerced people into voting for certain songs, but I don’t think that’s at all the case- you have to remember a lot of voters are casual viewers who don’t know the odds. What I’m trying to say is the odds and the final results roughly line up for a reason- because the bookies are good at predicting them.
Even for a conspiracy theory the arguments for a rigged competition are hilariously bad.
The points you make about a influence of the polls on the jury are valid and plausible. But they aren't a new problem. It is a surprise to nobody that Sweden won the jury vote and that Finland didn't do so well. (I expected even less from the jury for him tbh).
The other points like the mike are really farfetched. Even if they thought she might need it again - that could be because of her lead in all the polls prior to the competition. And this thing about ABBA just seems too random. Ofcourse they are famous and it would be nice, but to risk the reputation wouldn't have been worth it for the EBU or Sweden. And there is also the question how. I can only think of ways that would include way too many people and make it really likely that a whistleblower would leak it.
Sweden's victory was expected beforehand in pretty much every poll. The current voting system as well as it being eurovision legend Loreen explain her victory perfectly. Why is suddenly everyone surprised and can't accept it?
Demand a change of the system but don't ridicule yourself with conspiracy theories.
I can't think of a single person who is.
Results from Semi-final 1 gave Loreen 135 points and Kaarija 177 points. Loreen won in the final only because of the juries´ points in the final. Like a journalist said: "Sweden has ABBA´s 50th anniversary coming next year - let´s give them that."
Actually, looking back at how the contest went forLoreen, I was really dissapainted seeing all the limits she was exposed to. Starting with inability to bring the original screens and confirm the right angles for the performance and ending with being put before main competitor in the running order both times -- in semi and in grand final. I felt like EBU does everything to convince audiecne that they do not promote Loreen. In fact, they provided Finland with the best conditions possible. And therefore all of the allegations cannot be taken seriously
The Swedish delegation could have checked if the screens are possible (for safety reasons - because the building cannot hold them up!) in the UK venue before planning them into the Mello performance. Safety regulations are not limits someone gets exposed to. There were so many things wrong with the sound and set-up for all delegations that went wrong during rehearsals and still in the first semi, nobody was favoured there at all.
And Sweden drew first half and because of the stage set-up, they had to be after a break. That was position 9. Statistically a position with the same winning chance as position 13.
Jury...for an example, in our jury sat a man, who has been a part of ESC jury in a past, while simultaneously being author of the competing song, which did extremely well. Can you put In your full trust?
While it was not case this year it was in the past, a member of a jury was a men who likes to comment especially on female looks. This year he was rooting for Loreen's crothtc stretching, he always had juicy comments on boobs, oh noes if you had a kilogram to many on you. Is that a solid jury?
We put contestant of junior esc in a jury. Can be a genius, but can that really be a judge of, well, quality?
I am not a fan of these theories. Last year it was the same non-sense with Ukraine. They only won for the war, etc. I didn't agree; It was a good song. But... It is all a bit too much of a coincidence this year:
- It was Loreen all over, from the moment it was announce for Melfest till the final. How unrespectful is it toward the other artists?
- Why do you want to compete twice for something you already have won? It is kinda a weird. But the rules allow it, fair enough.
- Why did they show the viewers a new table with the number of wins at the beginning of the final? The only country that could have benefited from that was... Sweden. Fair? No.
- Why was a member of ABBA given about 3 minutes airtime, while they are usually hidden from any media. Suddenly they are in the ESC again. Coincidence. Obviously. Not!
- The supervisor is the producer of 2013 and 2016 and it from Sweden. He would obviously not have anything against some extra attention for his country.
And you even didn't mention Thomas G:son's copy paste work. He has done it before with the Belgian ESC song 'liefde is een kaartspel' and paid a fine after a court case when continuing denying it. They surely count on the chance that it doesn't become an issue. Or, but this is speculation, they already paid Mika for it upfront. If this becomes an issue anyway, they just pay. From all the profits they make from winning ESC that will be peanuts for them.
You can't make me believe they are unaware on the existence of that song. They are simply that arrogant. As an artist they should be ashamed, no matter if it is technically plagiarism or not. All those Loreen fans, which I was too for Euphoria, should re-think if this is the contest they want... I was in the venue and never felt such a awkward silence for the winning song. No, I don't fee sorry for Loreen. She knew what she was up to.
We all know who the real winner is. For all Swedish people. Keep the win. Organize it as you please, but voice that you can't agree with the way how this was arranged because it isn't right. There is nothing feeling okay about it, and if you're honest, you know this! Cut the crap.
Put the coke down
I mean, last year it was a clear FACT that people voted to show their respects.
Loreen had noting to do with anything, you better feel sorry for her, she only wanted to perform for her fans sake the competition part was not in her head, she prepered to potentially lose to Käärijä since she knew he was the favorite with the public, but then she won it must have felt really surreal to her. Howeve her winning was not a walk in the park, she worked really hard and therfore she deserve to be happy for her win. Stay mad at the juries if you want but don't disrespect Loreen!! She was good and second in the televote so her winning was not wrong but I understand the disappointment with Käärijä not winning.
We all know Kaarija deserved to win. We did win the audience and he was the clear protagonist of Eurovision this year🦚
Yes he deserved to win, as did France, as did Sweden. In the end though Sweden won. I loved Finland, but the very first time I listened to a condensed version of all 37 songs some weeks ago, I knew instantly that Sweden would win... the song is just superior.
@@AlmaGCN Tattoo is basic. It's an ok song. Same pop formula as always. Well produced and executed. But nothing new or special
Yes. Many performers were worthy of winning, but only one completely stole the show💚
About Loreen's win, it feels targeted but not rigged, it seem that Sweeden and EBU try to push it but more to influnce the audience and Jury, and Loreen was a good to cover more than one demografic at the same time:
Is enough pop to be like by the juries, but not too pop to be considerer "shallow" like Solo
Is a good enough performance to be like by the more picky public and jury, but not so over done that overshadow the song. She is alone, but she doesn't feel empty like Cyprus
Is reconciable enough to be nostalgic, but not too much
Has enough artistic vision to be value by the jury and public, but not to much avant garde or artistic to be alienating like Spain or Serbia.
Has the mystic that if she wins, she would be the first woman to win twice, also the first poc.
Overall it's a pretty safe song, plus Loreen is already beloved by the jury and the public, even if she didn't get 12 in any country, she is still came number 2 in the televotes, with a big marging between 1st and 2nd, but still, she was liked enough to get 243 points.
I couldn't understand why Sweden were miles ahead in the betting. The song wasn't anything special imho. Even if the mic question can be debunked it looked bad,as if Loreen knew she'd be singing again(a lot of people won't look any further into it). I guess the jury members were made aware that Abba 50 was coming up. At the end of the day I think it will backfire against Sweden next year. It probably wasn't rigged,but there is suspicion about . It would be funny if Finland or Ireland won it. I think there'll be plenty of drama anyway. Popcorn at the ready !
The second I hear Loreen is back at ESC I knew Sweden will win (and I follow ESC for 15 yrs now) and this year ESC wasn't much exciting competiton. I am not saying she didn't deserve I really like her, but yea this year was meh.... many great songs were robbed and example Gorgia didn't even pass to final. I don't think we need remove jury but we need them to be more transparent and televote should be a tie breaker if needed. And also maybe lower their impact overall because in the end it is apperantly "Europe" and viewers who choose the winner. I felt like my votes don't even count this year.
5:04 I'm not sure but I think she was the only one with that sort of mic, Kaarija, Alessandra, Noa etc. had other mics, the ones you can hold in your hand
I wonder what would happen if they sent loreen and alexander rybak at the same time for eurovision...
Well, probably no conspiracies. However, it is a fact that juries are mostly comprised of pop-loving-producing professionals.
Should we thus be surprised that they love an extremely highly produced popsong that sounds like all highly produced popsongs before it?
I'm not sure it's rigged but for sure they pushed everything in Sweden's favor. After watching this video my feeling about something not right here has only grown.
The best song and performance rarely win Eurovision, the Jury vote was introduced to reduce the politics of Eurovision but clearly the Jury aren't immune from political interference.
I'm displeased with it because it's a clear plagiarized mash
-up mess of a song.
Spain was PERFECT and the juries literally passed out of them. NOW THAT IS A ROB!
as an aussie even BEFORE we had the blessing of being part of the competition i thought it was getting old seeing sweden win sometimes! its like ergh ok now everyone clap * slow claps while sweden smuggly waves at audience * like... its getting boring when i see them win. Over here Eurovision comes on incredibly early in the morning for us so i always wake up after everythings happened. I ask my roomies who won? "sweden" ofc they did * sigh * just...ergh
@Alicia Samali I don't remember when I even loved their song last time, yet they always have the advantage of the juries
@Alicia Samali They are not complete failure, they are just average boring middle of the road plastic pop. Tthere are multiple people who will consume that, I'll give you that.
@Alicia Samali 🤦🏻♀️
Whatever, mate.
I just feel bad for Loreen... she didn't chose any of this. She was just there to deliver a great performance - which she did.
I hope the "fandom" cools down soon enough and starts giving the queen her flowers.
Yes, it is VERY convenient that Loreen came back to take the contest home to sweden for ABBAs 50th anniversary, so i understand the suspicion. But trust me when i say that Loreen is NOT the mastermind behind this supposed conspiracy, so STOP SENDING *HER* HATE!!!!
If anything, be mad at eurovision, be mad at Melodifestivalen, be mad at SVT.
I think Loreen should be completely seperated from this backlash. Let's celebrate her like every other contestant, like every other winner!!!
I and most people I spoke to hadn't seen anyone mention that it was 50 years since ABBA won. Not before the final anyway!
She chose to be the face of the problem lol
@@samuelgalea7679 no? She didn't decide to participate after winning? She couldn't have known that she would get so many jury points in the eurovision grand final when entering the swedish preselection.
If you look at the detailed jury voting, rigged results in some countries are even more probable. Let's take my favourites: San Marino and Poland that for two years in a row had shady jury voting. Finland was dead last in San Marino and 24th in Poland (only above Croatia) xD
i think you give people behind the show too much credit. No way they are smart enough to actually orchestra a full blown corruption scandal like this. Whats more likely happened is, that its loreen, and sweden. She kicked a little ass, and the juries went apeshit. I meen Tatoo is the whole package really, and her result is pretty justified. it came with the right person and country. Loreen has allways loved Eurovision and has entered Melodifestivalen several times before and after 12. Besides.. 240 something telepoints is not bad you know. a lot of likers out there too.
I wanted Käärija to win like everyone else. BUT. I listened to the final performance in the car without the visuals. He struggled really hard on those vocals. relied on backing vocals and effects pretty much through out all the song. Just like a certain woman from Poland everyone hates about because of the exact same thing. It pains me to say it, but it kind a sounded poorly at times. The sheer charisma and catchiness and party vibe carries that song soo much. I would not say that 150 something points for a poor vocal performance is that bad. I sure cant remember when a not great vocal performance was given that many Jury points.
But i will say that the presentation of wins and the mention of Abba this year off all the years is a bit strange. They mention Abba like allmost every year but still. Anyways. my final feeling is like this. "The total package won, instead of the explosive fun". Like a solid hot caring housewife instead of the super kinky/wild rock chick you started a fling with. I dont know if that maked sense.
I loved it all.
The most coherent comment Ive read.
Frankly IDC. I just enjoy all the artist and music they bring to the stage. It's always fun to watch.
Loreen mic was not on and she used that type on mic in her preformance and most of the others had hand-mics. Why would it be rigged? Abba would've make a guest preformance in Finland if that was the case. If she sucked so bad why did people from the televoters still vote for her? The Jury gave her 12 points but the televoters could vote 20 times for their favorite so if you didn't vote, Why complain? If this was a political move from the other countries then why not give 12 to Finland who is now a part of Nato or to England who crowned their new king? Why did they give 12 to Israel? If it was about poletics then why did the Jury last year give 12 to England while the televoters gave the most scores to Ukraine? Who was political then and why isn't anyone claiming it was rigged back then? The Jury doesn't control or top the majority of the votes, though the Eurovision history there is the majority of winner where both Jury and Televoters have been on the same page of their favorite and alot of other times there's been contestants who won based only on televoters votes. Ya'll claim it was rigged but for what? We have no benefit and no political benefit either and especially not after this either. This year was the toughest competition I've seen and everyone gave it their all and was outstanding. Even if Sweden wouldn't have won, someone else would claim it was rigged. Sweden and Loreen had nothing to do with this. It's getting out of hand and there's no logic behind the hate
One thing I'd like to add that gave Sweden an advantage. Prior to the contest, the only Eurovision songs that we're played on the radio where I'm from were our own entry...and Sweden's. Not sure if this also happened in other countries, but I wouldn't be surprised. This gave people time to familiarize themselves with the song ahead of the contest, which often makes people grow fond of it. No other country's song was played outside of the aforementioned two. Even after the contest ended, it's just those two, unless listeners ask for another (like Finland).
Sure, you could say that hearing the perfected version could lead to criticism on the performance in Eurovision or that people would get tired of it. But people are very likely to ignore that for the most part.
If her song wasn't on the radio constantly, I wouldn't be surprised if she barely missed first place or even the top 3. The way I see it, she didn't win because of the song or the performance. She won because she's Loreen and was already well known because of Euphoria.
Of course I'm not saying her song is bad. It really isn't, but imo it wasn't the best either and received help to secure the win.
So what? Queen of the Kings was also popular on Tiktok before the contest, even more so than Tattoo
@@manueltreill6358 Queen of Kings' popularity was very much shown by the televote. Also, I do believe radio has a wider range than Tiktok, especially among older generations.
Still, having a handful of songs becoming well-known pre-contest gives them an unfair advantage imo.
@@yann1ck666 Norway came 6th in the semi final though and only a few points ahead of freaking Switzerland (7th). In the final she just had a good running order that boosted her and she sounded better. Anywho it's not like she or anyone forced this so g to become famous, it just became and if a song does become famous before the contest, that's a pretty damn good achievement
It's a good song, so I won't complain. It was definitely Tattoo and cha cha cha that were top two best songs, and that's how it was rated in the end so I think it's pretty accurate in that regard. I do feel like some other countries were rated too low, however
There were better songs
@@janeslater8004 … in YOUR opinion. many disagree.
I don't get being able to vote 20 times. If I send 1 vote and someone else sends in 20, it basically makes mine pointless and I cba to sit there calling 20 times. Also it may be cheap to do so but its still money making it technically pay to win...
You could vote through the app
@@_loss_ app redirects to regular messaging
yes, poor people have less to say. basic democracy in a capitalist world.
voting should definitely be free.
@@UnscrambledEggs
You realise the cost of voting is set by the broadcaster, not the EBU. The country with the highest cost of televote is Estonia.
I prefer the exciting competitions for sure! I'd prefer maybe 5+ countries I knew could win and loved and that way the voting actually matters. Eurovision 2023 was a two horse race at best, but it was pretty clear Loreen was always going to win and I think it took away the excitement.
I did not like the song at all. I was surprised she won. Yes great voice. Yes pretty cool outfit and set for her. But the win??? not so much. It's a SONG contest. Her song was not the best. I agree with you Rudi.
5:16 - I don't agree with this point as many singers this year like Finland, the UK, Austria and France were using hand mics this year so that is why not many artists had mics in the green room
there is a tiktok about this point as well - I cant find it anymore
Not me immediately answering "yes" before clicking on the vid shdkajsdasj I hope Sweden has a blast during that ABBA 50th anniversary Eurovision
I think the current voting system should be implemented into the semifinals but still have them not tell us semi final placements and then have the finals either all televise or maybe 75% televise and 25% jury or something like that. If that were implemented then some biases would be quite visible in final results such as Ukraine winning 2022 but some biases like Greece giving Cyprus 12 points would be mostly abolished
The whole "the juries were brought in to balance out the countries' biases" is (1) the most overtly undemocratic rule I've seen in a supposed voting contest, (2) reeks of Certain Countries crying about how "everyone hates them and that's why they don't win", and we must appease them because they're politically influential, (3) has already proven to be a disaster and that juries are consistently bought and paid for, (4) renders the televote just a waste of everyone's money, to the benefit of the EBU. We should honestly be ashamed that we ever let that nonsense in. And to everyone saying that the juries "shouldn't be totally abolished" - you're wrong. They should. We didn't vote for them, we didn't choose them, they're a random selection of easily bought puppets whose one vote counts the same as hundreds od thousands of ours. They should be gone, and immediately.
Happens in the Olympics. A French judge manipulated the panel at ice skating for Russia to win.
@@celtspeaksgoth7251 I remember that! I follow figure skating, and that entire debacle ushered in the "Tuberidze bonus" that became the norm, where whichever skater skates for an influential coach is awarded higher component scores than the rest who skate under different coaches. It's as ridiculous there as it is here - even more so, because in figure skating it legitimized a really abusive coach and her methods that almost universally result in permanent, life-altering injuries. At least here all that's injured is a sense of justice.
yeah, Loreen was expected to win and I think that's why people liked Cha Cha Cha so much, especially the people that were actually there in liverpool. It was an amazing performance and the song is just.. different compared to what is usually in the contest.
I myself don't really like the song, but what the people want the people should get. I also don't care how rigged the contest was, Loreen deserves no hate as she did nothing wrong. The fact that people hate on her is crazy to me
for me i feel like people voted for him because yk she won eurovision and not bc of the song nor performance
Why not a representative of each entry checking the votes of televoting as in any election that wants to be transparent? There would be fewer shadows over the voting process. Are the organizers ready for it?🎉
People want a change in the Jury just because they didn't give enough points to Finland to win... Really? I mean is not the job of the juries to predict the people's choices, I agree a better professionnal jury will give better results, but that doesn't mean that next year if they improve, they will be aligned with the televote, maybe the difference will be higher, also people should stop the "the jury only vote for pop trash music" I'm sorry guys, who gave Poland an 8th place?.... Who gave spain the last place with only 5 points?.... If next year the jury improves, good, if it stays like it is today, good. We need that balance
Her microphone is glued to her skin and it hurts to take off, it wasn't a handheld mic. It would hurt to take it off.
Yeah she likes sniffing glue and taking other substances. Note how her carer was with her at all times.
She is Swedish-Moroccan and the event name checked Moroccan Oil. Hmm...
You could see she was off her head.
I think the fans were behind Loreen and it isnt like she only one because of juries. She was a predicted winner and I think juries are needed to bring up songs like Spain because the televote really underrates entrys.
I wouldn’t say rigged but certainly very carefully orchestrated towards a win for Sweden for their Abbavision next year. The jury were a disgrace, and it was not only boring but so unfair towards some other outstanding acts. My husband who is only a casual viewer and never heard of Loreen said he couldn’t understand why she was getting so many 12s and it seemed fixed.
I always find the jury to be a stain on the show anyway but this year really sucked the joy and life right out of me once and for all. Seeing the overwhelming public opinion count for nothing, especially when we pay for the privilege, and Käärijä so clearly devastated was awful and I’m not going to watch others being humiliated with such low scores either. In future I’ll listen to all the entries, download my favourites and give the contest a miss.
I’m from the U.K. and the only thing I agreed with was our low placing after a very weak performance but Germany didn’t deserve that at all, not if the jury are doing their job properly and judging all genres of music. Really boring to have Sweden host again too, would like to see what others have to offer but it’s never going to happen. I already predict that bookmakers favourites next year will be returning Luxembourg and Sweden again, and jury will return to semifinals in 2025 to ensure Sweden qualifies. No hatred towards Swedes or Loreen intended but there does seem to be an annoying dominance when it comes to Eurovision. Greetings from a bored and disgruntled fan.
I'm gonna take another look at this performance and say that I dint enjoy any second of it. We all love stage shows with lightnings and etc but I didn't wait for a year to just see a manicure floating around. Her vocals are so strong and heart touching, I know but we all knew that since she won the Eurovision in 2012. For the second time, this peformance was just belove my expectations. It is almost the same as Euphoria. She literally took whatever she could from her last performance. In conclusion, I didn't like it. And I don't think that the voting system in Eurovision is fair enough.
Let’s get her back in 10 years to win again 😂😂😂😂
Or send ABBA next year!
The situation this year is interesting, as it is the reversed one from last year.
Kalush Orchestras televote completely overthrowed the jury votes with 439 points last year. That said: even with Loreen's head start this year it actually wasn't impossible for Käärija to win the competition. If she didn't come second in televotes, she might not even have won. I also don't find it wrong to have music professionals as juries. Professionals can shed another light and perspective onto the songs. As fun as the Bejba was, but becoming third in the semi and getting lots of televotes in the final while in contrast Georgia didn't even make the cut, or Spain only got 5 televotes was kinda cruel xD and does not necessarily add to diversity, originality, performance and song quality (if we are talking about a televote only approach).
And to have the chance to either appeal to the jurys or to the televote or possibly both actually adds to a lot more diversity. Look, personally I life for big ballads, amazing lightning and big voices and I want to see them in the competition. If they don't get rewarded, we might lose them.
Becoming second as a result of jury and tele vote is actually an outstanding success, especially with this tough competition. Käärjas career just started. I never worry about Top Ten, not even the finalists, but about countries like Latvia and Georgia, that have a really hard time getting through to the final, even when they send good, out of the box songs. I tend to say that small countries with less exposure, money and diaspora's get disregarded by televotes.
How can we keep them engaged?
Shining moments like North Macedonia in 2019 wouldn't have been possible without juries! Juries also reward originality, but hereby often based on strong vocal live performances. Aminata, Rona, Blanca Paloma.
It is indeed difficult to compare so vastly different songs and that's why I think we got a good balance with the split votes. We also could announce two winners per edition, the televote and juryvote winner (like FiK) if it's such a big deal. But honestly, i think we put to much weight and meaning into the results and winning. What does it even mean, when Serbia has six points more than the UK, it doesn't actually matter. Each year we have controversies and honestly after one, two days of hate from people, (mostly from people that don't even care about eurovision), my fyp finally cleared and Loreen finally gets the credit, that she deserves, as well as Käärja and the other contestants.
As long as someone's favourite doesn't win, we will always have controversies. But if we want to keep some kind of balance and diversity, we should keep the juries.
Also Loreen had the mic, because all the other contestants had other kinds of microphones during their performances, as she needed both of her hands during her performance. It wasn't even on, as she was interviewed during the jury votes with other mics and you couldn't hear her when she won, not until she had to go all the way from the greenroom to backstage to get finally connected for the final performance. Kinda frustrating that people believe these conspiracies so easily.
it was rigged last year also, and when israel won it also was rigged bc dana international had her 20th anniverary also
Exactly. I cant believe people cant see it. O predicted sweden months ago for abba reason. I was right. People dont understand the corrupt world we live in
From a Swedes perspeective. 1st of all is Abbas comeback, or win in 1974 isnot a good enough reason (considering) all hell that would break lose if this came out to be rigged. Imagine all the money people have wasted for votes. Thats not worth it, why would it be. The only reason why these conspiracy theories come up is because Sweden is like Canada in hockey in Eurovision. Everyone hates the best and Sweden has been the best for the last 12 years if you look at where they have ended up on the scoreboard. Thats why theres no shot for us to win the televotes anymore. In my honest opinion i think Sweden needs to take a break from this competition and come back in 5 years or something to even have a chance to get televotes. The Jury will always have the Swedes side since we have all the nordic countries votes there, but we are not the only country with neighbours giving points 8keep that in mind). But Sweden usually get alot of points from the Jury since we have really great production in our songs and actually, Sweden is the biggest and greatest export when it comes to Pop music in the whole world, so dont be surprised by how many jury votes we get when u look at the voting in the future.
Of course it wasn’t rigged. Just listen to the song with that unordernary strong power ful voice with an incredible Intensity and dramatic appearance! And the melody and rhythm and composition is fantastic. Together with that fabulous performance this is a totally outstanding contribution with no concurrence at all.
I don't think it was "rigged" per say. But what I do think has been happening, specially in the last few years, is that people start picking their favourites before they even see the artists perform in the semi-final or finals. This can clearly be seen by taking a look at the Eurovision odds where the winner has been predicted correctly for last few years. This year Sweden was first an they won, last year it was Ukraine and they won, the year before it was Italy and they won.
Since humans have a herding behavior, once a group of people start hyping a song, others quickly follow.
The problem with this type of favouritism and bias before the contest is even held is that it completely takes the element of surprise away when it comes to the winner of the competition.
I know this is impossible but I would love that the songs weren't revealed before the contest. So we would see them for the first time in the contest and maybe stop this favouritism and heard behavior and truly get people's preference without bias.
(And of course I'm not even touching the politics of the contest. That's a whole other gigantic discussion.)
I mean, if i wanted to give my fellow countries a holler about which country to vote on, i would, to make sure "our fav" would win.
Its just the thing that its hard to get all the people to hear that holler and follow suit.
Easier for the Jury, some of the countries its just one person, or three.
IMHO Loreen won in the same way as Jinkx won the last lipsync in All Stars 7
It is hard to compare the semis to the final now- we have 2 different competitions- a televote one and a televote/jury one........I think they should both be the same or else the Big5 get the advantage of competing in one type of competition and the rest have to prepare for 2 different types of competition.