Random ESC thoughts
May. 20th, 2008 07:16 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kribbanI read that as a new rule this year the highest ranking entry picked by the jury that wasn't chosen by the public will also qualify for the finale.
In other words; the televote selects 9 entries and the jury selects 1 entry. This is great, but IMO the jury should select 3 entries.
I also think that in the finale the jury should have some say. I don't want to go back to an all jury vote, but I want the jury to award some points as well. In Sweden we get half the points from a televote and half the points from the jury.
Call me elitist, but I think a professional jury will be more neutral and only look to the quality of the entry and not weigh in things like:
"I love this artist!"
"That country is next to my country!"
"This entry has a good shock effect!"
"That sure looks like a sympathetic fellow!"
"This entry is the only one capable of beating the entry that I hate!"
On the other hand, a professional jury might have very set notions of what an ESC song should sound like and might be less inclined to vote for songs of certain genres.
So in my opinion: popular vote + jury = increased chance of good Top Ten.
Furthermore: there is a difference between originality and gimmick.
Take Finland 2006. Yes, it was a bit weird with the monster costumes, but the song was still a good song. It wasn't a joke entry, it was performed seriously and struck a cord in people.
Compare that to Ukraine 2007 or *shudder* Ireland 2008. This is not originality or good music. This is just shock for the sake of shock.
Anyway, I'm hopeful Europe has better taste than that.
In other words; the televote selects 9 entries and the jury selects 1 entry. This is great, but IMO the jury should select 3 entries.
I also think that in the finale the jury should have some say. I don't want to go back to an all jury vote, but I want the jury to award some points as well. In Sweden we get half the points from a televote and half the points from the jury.
Call me elitist, but I think a professional jury will be more neutral and only look to the quality of the entry and not weigh in things like:
"I love this artist!"
"That country is next to my country!"
"This entry has a good shock effect!"
"That sure looks like a sympathetic fellow!"
"This entry is the only one capable of beating the entry that I hate!"
On the other hand, a professional jury might have very set notions of what an ESC song should sound like and might be less inclined to vote for songs of certain genres.
So in my opinion: popular vote + jury = increased chance of good Top Ten.
Furthermore: there is a difference between originality and gimmick.
Take Finland 2006. Yes, it was a bit weird with the monster costumes, but the song was still a good song. It wasn't a joke entry, it was performed seriously and struck a cord in people.
Compare that to Ukraine 2007 or *shudder* Ireland 2008. This is not originality or good music. This is just shock for the sake of shock.
Anyway, I'm hopeful Europe has better taste than that.
