Wonder what would have happened if Israel had won.
So the event is over, huh? And it went right past me again. They can bring it to Switzerland and still I wonât notice it. 
And now everybody is fighting? I wish this software had the rolling emoj like EF did. Seriously?!?
Ah well, actually itâs a good thread to have your bitching and biting ⊠itâs kind of off-site now, right?
I suggest a new line when ever quarrel arises: âGo to your room! Itâs the Eurovision oneâ.
The sappy song won 
Milkshake Man came up in the radio yesterday. It goes well along more synthwave/retrowave. Will not hate it if itâs played on the radio 
OK, you made me watch this. I wasnât disappointed.
But fans were obviously disappointed that this didnât go to the finals: âThis man gave you an OUTFIT CHANGE IN A BLENDER, EUROPE! WHAT MORE DO YOU WANT?!?!â
It was a very âEurovisionâ song 
2 Likes
Iâve watched it (partially) and I wasnât disappointed at all - it was a very Eurovision-y contest. 
I didnât watch it - and I wasnât disappointed at all!
4 Likes
Youâre wise. Anyway, seeing other countriesâ junk is way funnier than seeing your own countryâs junk.
I find television very educating â when someone turns it on, I go to another room, to read a book (Groucho Marx)
2 Likes
Several broadcasters have raised concerns about the audience voting in the 2025 ESC. There was a noticeable discrepancy between the jury and public voting for Israelâs entry. The EBU in Geneva which organizes the contest, says the voting results from all countries were reported âcorrectlyâ.
The Israeli singer received 60 points from the juries, placing 15th, but was the clear favorite with the public, receiving 297 votes and finishing 2nd overall. In contrast, Switzerlandâs entry ZoĂ« MĂ« was highly ranked by the juries but received no votes from the public, finishing 10th.
Broadcasters like Spainâs RTVE and Flemish VRT have called for a review of the audience voting process, questioning whether the current system accurately reflects viewer opinions. The EBU says it will have a comprehensive discussion about the voting ahead of next yearâs edition in Austria.
BBC News reported yesterday that the Spanish Prime Minister has called for Israel to be banned from the ESC over its military action in Gaza. The interesting part is that the article mentions that:
âAhead of the Eurovision final on Saturday, RTVE aired a message in support of Palestinians - despite being warned to avoid references to Gaza by the EBU.â
Wow, how convenient that the EBU, which is conveniently located in Geneva, tried to sweep the situation in Gaza under the rug and ignore it, rather than allowing broadcasters to address the issue.
The Geneva Conventions, which the EBU in Geneva is supposed to uphold, explicitly prohibit attacks on civilians and the destruction of civilian infrastructure during wartime. Yet the situation in Gaza appears to be a clear violation of these international laws. Itâs almost as if the EBU is more interested in protecting Israel than in defending human rights and international law.
1 Like
Switzerland had 214 votes from the jury and 0 from the public. Maybe the jury lives in an alternative reality and doesnât really represent the views of the public?
It should be one or the other.
I guess the point of a jury is that it supposedly stops protest/political/tactical voting but sometimes I think itâs the opposite.
Tinfoil hat time, absolute speculation.
First. Think about TV executives. The choice for next year is between having a good time in Vienna, or wondering if that LOUD sound is part of the song or the air attack alarm sirens.
Then, ESC is a business with revenue and profits. Even people in Israel acknowledge that the worst thing after being 2nd would have been winning. That only opens the door for uncomfortable conversations in Israel and abroad, and putting Israel in a very vulnerable position for media attacks from around the world. So, TV executives donât want to risk the event for something they even canât change. After all, itâs their job duty to ensure a successful event. If the event goes awry, there could be complains about not doing their job.
So, avoid personal worries about alarm sirens, skip multiple uncomfortable conversations and overall stress at the job.
Would you do it? Since itâs victimless arrangement, Iâd probably do.
It is up to each national broadcaster to allow their viewers to take part in the vote. Of course " you cannot vote for your own country " . Voting takes place by SMS, via the official Eurovision mobile applicationâŠ
Just hypothetically if I wanted to affect the voting by SMS I would hire a few IT experts from a certain country known for their black arts - a pager hack springs to mind.
I wonder if there was a significant increase in the number of votes cast.
1 Like
I asked Perplexity, please take it with a grain of salt:
There are concerns and allegations about the possibility of Eurovision SMS votes being manipulated or hacked, especially given the system allows individuals to vote up to 20 times per phone for a fee
Letâs make two different contests. One solely for the jury, they may even not show it on the TV to save costs and not let us know the results (as nobody cares anyway). And one big event for the public with public votes only.
They have to invite Xi Jinping. No shelling guaranteed.
The EBU itself opens the door for problematic voting practices by allowing anyone to vote up to 20 times. So the system is already flawed to begin with.
The pro-pali protests and hate towards Israel provide a lot of encouragement to Israelis and pro-Israel people to vote in the ESC even if they donât really care about the music. The pro-palis made the event ten times more political than it used to be, and theyâre absolutely the ones to thank for when it comes to Israel entryâs results.
In previous years, when there wasnât an ongoing war, Israelâs ranking was mostly determined by the quality of the songs (and there were some really bad ones, by the way).
This yearâs entry had an emotional backstory and a powerful performance but the song itself wasnât very good. The public vote was a response to the protests and attacks of the media. Oh, and thanks to the Israeli government, there are many, many Israelis living abroadâŠ
Sometimes? 
Btw, I think the same jury is selecting the song for Eurovision in some countries (if not all).
In my opinion, the whole Eurovision shenanigans donât justify the costs. If you have a real chance to win, we could say the contest will bring tourists etc. If not, and most countries will probably never win even if they have the best song, why on earth spend money on this?
I want a referendum on this shit. I want those money spent on public facilities, music lessons for kids etc. Itâs more important to invest in musical education and support young artists in your country IMHO.
I think this should be a contest for the rich countries, they can afford to splash money around.
You got me curious so I did a quick search around / ChatGPT, not a bad earner for what it is:
Economic Impact on Host Cities
Hosting the Eurovision Song Contest can provide a significant economic boost to the host city. For instance:Eurovision+2Eurovision+2ESCToday+2
- Liverpool 2023: The city experienced a net economic benefit of ÂŁ54.8 million, with 306,000 visitors attending Eurovision events and spending on accommodations, dining, and entertainment .Eurovision+1BBC+1
- Malmö 2024: The event generated approximately âŹ38 million in tourism-related economic turnover, with 51,430 unique visitors and 159,680 visits to official Eurovision venues .Eurovoix+1Eurovision+1
- Basel 2025: The city expects to generate about CHF 60 million (âŹ64 million) from hosting the event .
What for? Let the parents pay 1600 CHF/year for one 40 min lesson per week from their pocket.
1 Like