Ewan Spence writes: They managed it with Doctor Who, but can the BBC reinvent the Eurovision Song Contest in nine months?
With Terry Wogan standing down, now is the perfect time to reshape the UK’s view of Eurovision from a yearly obligation to something that is celebrated. Our next entry needs to step out on the stage, with the country believing they can do well.
The truth is, there is no political voting. Maybe this played a part when the jury was eight people in a room, but in a national phone poll, scrutinised by all, can you truthfully say that members of the public are deciding on the basis of foreign relations?
This year’s winner, Russia’s Dima Bilan, is a massive star. He’s a known quantity in Russia and the surrounding countries and that made it easy for people to vote for him.
The top songs on the night are still the most popular songs three months later in online charts. While not an exact match for the final results table, the general thrust is clear. A good song will get respectable results.
Nobody really knew the monstrous rockers Lordi in 2006, yet they still won. For the UK, getting a respectable result would be as good as a victory — not since Jessica Garlick in 2002 have we been higher than 16th.
The X Factor approach to choosing our entry could work with professional performers, but placing a member of the public into the pressure cooker environment of a stadium with all Europe looking on is tempting fate. It worked with Garlick (ex-Pop Idol), but both Jemini and Andy Abraham (ex-X Factor) were woefully under-prepared. A poor or badly-judged performance can destroy any hopes of a good result. There must be a strong team backing up whoever wins, a team with experience of stadium performance and showmanship, ensuring we have a confident act on stage with little nerves.
The BBC must work to make Eurovision palatable to professional songwriters and artists again. For 2009, it needs to make a conscious effort to clean the Eurovision name.
The contest will run for a full entire week in Moscow, with rehearsals, events and two semi-finals all leading up to the Grand Final on the Saturday night. If the BBC can devote acres of coverage to the latest Andrew Lloyd Webber production and create an enduring emotional link with the county, it should do the same with Eurovision.
For the UK to win again, we (the public and the BBC) need to believe that we can. That’s the goal for 2009. Clear away the snide remarks, the bad smell and the sarcastic commentary, then present Eurovision for what it is — one of the longest and most popular TV shows on the planet, and one that everyone should be proud to be associated with.
Aim for respectability in 2009, and then we can talk about victory in 2010.
- This column also appears in the current issue of The Stage, available from most major newsagents.
What a great article!
Honestly the British can be so flippant sometimes about things, and Eurovision is a real competition and watched not just in Europe but all around the world. It rates quite highly in Australia.
Look at the British medal count at the Olympics this year. The effort was well paid off!
Britain didn't get to be the nation it is today of the back of the flippant and ironic attitude it seems to take to everything these days.
While we could look back in the old days and say that the UK music scene was superior can we really say so today? What good music comes from Britain these days? It's all talent shows. And then we have the hide to look down on a talent show like Eurovision. It has been around a lot longer than X Factor.
Some countries really make an effort and present something different and for me that makes Eurovision worth watching.
Yeah! I totally agree this is really a great article!
I live in Southern California, USA and I could remember on the Wednesday night, I watched the award show of this year "American Idol" but I could not feel the vibration, the excitement at all compared to the first semi-final show that I watched a day before! Through live streaming, I could enjoy the second show of Eurovision this year and it was even better than the first one! The performances were totally authentic, powerful, mesmerizing with spectacular background enhancements, lightings, dancing and above all, vocal capacity. The performances that I did not like were less then five! Even though, Eurovision has been the burning subject when it comes to critics and polical bloc voting, I still appreciate the concept of Eurovision as the place of cultural unification as well as acknowledged musical diversity! The contest exceeds the meaning of personal accomplishment of a singer. Many news papers, especially UK media, have been adamant to accuse political voting of last year as well as this year'sresult. They justified their assumption academically by publishing some research about the voting! However, they failed to address the important obvious awareness that neighbor countries share strong linguitic, cultural, musical interferences that direct them toward a similar taste. However, the history of the contest really witnesses the victory of different nationalities. Especially, the past few years, matching the period of UK's bitterness about the results, I could highly appreciate the seriousness and great deal of performing efforts from those Balkan, Eastern and Scandinavian countries.
To me, Eurovision should deserve some positive comments, as well as critically unbiased article like this! Highly applausible article!
Incredibly Great job Eurovision! I am not European! I don't live in Europe but I certainly am a big big fan of Eurovision!!!!
The only way forward for the UK is to attract a huge star, know all over europe, say Robbie Williams, or a band like Muse or Coldplay. But that will never happen while it is seen as a biased contest. So it is well overdue a overhaul, the BBC should stop their massive funding and just put in the same amount as all the other TV companies.
Belinda, the massive amount that the BBC pitches in to Eurovision is not as much as you would think - The Mirror reports it as around £173,000. For 2008 that produces around 3.5 hours of Saturday prime time television, ratings in the upper end of expectation, and another 6 or 7 hours on BBC3 to cover the semi-finals.
You might want to see how much 50 minutes of Doctor Who or Casualty cost before you call the funding 'massive.' I think the mix of televote/jury will help with the perceptions of bias, and your comment shows that for a win to happen, the BBC need to spend 2009 making it respectable, so we can get a Williams, Muse or Coldplay.
Because The Mirror is such a reliable source of accurate fact...
I don't think this is a great article at all, sorry. I think, whether it is cultural similarity or not, these countries vote for each other because they want a country they relate to to win, perhaps obviously. This might not be political voting, but it is bloc voting. And now Europe has become so diluted with various eastern bloc countries, that means the UK could have a very respectable song and not get anywhere near the top of the table. The UK, internationally, is just not that popular, and unless it was a cross over artist that really had fans everywhere, in this current climate, there's no way we could win. Andy Abraham carried a lot of popular support in this country - it takes a fair few votes to get far in the X Factor, whether that format is ridiculed or not.
So yes, a cracking song would be a great start, whether the artist is already a creditable singer or a new comer, but even then that gives no cause to the expanse of newer European countries to vote for us. Even our own neighbours don't vote for us, apart from Ireland. I think a lot of that has to do with being an island as well. We don't actually have any land neighbours, and how many people from the European countries nearest to us one, actually compete, and two, play host to ex pats willing to pick up the phone and vote for the country they once knew. You see, most people are coming to our country for whatever reason, and then phone voting for their old home. Whereas the Brits, on the whole, don't emigrate in such droves, and even if they do it's most likely to Australia, USA, Canada - which, lest we forget, don't vote at all.
Therefore, in conclusion, I think the dry tone with which the Eurovision is viewed is entirely well placed. I need that sarcasm and irony to get me through the repetitive voting which every year sees us come last or second to last, even with a faintly respectable song. It's become a joke, which is sad. When I was a kid, you voted for the best song. Now, it's more about supporting your neighbours, and as I've pointed out, in that case, Britain just can't, and won't, win.
THANK YOU EWAN SPENCE.
FINALLY! Somebody with a bit of sense and respect for Eurovision in this country. I couldn't possibly agree more with everything you have written and I sincerely hope that Eurovision can become an event looked forward to by the UK and all of Europe. A few bad songs and silly acts is all part of the experience but generally it's a fantastic event immensely looked forward to by millions of people all over the world. I am so glad to have read this article, thank you again.
Now that Alkistis Protopsalti is not yet representing Greece, now may be a great time to offer Sarah Brightman, Vanessa-Mae, or bond to Eurovision! This voting procedure may cause them to win, or, if they do poorly, it will be strict proof that the Slavs won't cease to support each other. The United Kingdom is known as a country of light-hearted pop, so this would be a positive metamorphosis into the classical/crossover realm. This is an untapped power house that can do wonders. This is a suggestion for those who want to indeed take Eurovision seriously. For those sceptical of the new voting format, as I am-2008's format was intended to make things more fair while it had the opposite effect-continue the X-Factor business and do as well as you have been doing thus far! I can empathize with those, too. If Hind represented Armenia with "Your Heart Belongs To Me" and if Sirusho represented the Netherlands with "Qele Qele", Armenia would still have attained a place in the Final leaving the Dutch in the dumps!
Ally,
How well did "Even If" do as a single when it was released after Eurovision? It never made it into the Top 40 (peaking at #67). His albums released right after Eurovision failed to chart. That doesn;t sound like carrying popular support in the county.
And I'm sorry, I really disagree with the arguement that the best song doesn't. You'll find a more in-depth discussion on this over on my blog, but in short, using online music charts such as Last.FM you can see that the songs that did well at Eurovision continue to get listened to around the world, while the songs that came in the lower reaches of the charts do not gather as many listens. The popular songs do well at Eurovision, the poor songs do not.
Ewan
Great article and you are dead right - the UK needs to start taking it seriously again and send bigger and better acts and songs to Eurovision.
I honesty don't believe it all comes down to Bloc voting. The reason these countries have been highly placed for the last few years is because they take Eurovision seriously enough to send their best and biggest acts year after year. See Dima Bilan in 2006/2008, Ani Lorak in 2008, Tatu in 2004, Brainstorm in 2000. The acts have a large fanbase not just in their home country but in the geographical area, and also have experience in performing to bigger crowds. They know how to deliver a great song and great show in front of thousands of people. All qualities that the likes of an X-Factor runner-up can't really match.
In addition, the countries threw their weight behind these and promoted the act and song highly in the lead-up to Eurovision, not just in their own territory, but throughout Europe. This is something that is also lacking with the UK entries.
I know that if I was voting this year (I live in Australia) my 8,10 and 12 points would have been going to those higher up on the table. And I still appreciate those songs and listen to them months later.
And as much as I adore listening to Wogans commentary for a laugh, the fact that he's gone means we have the opportunity to overhaul the feel that the UK brings to Eurovision with its commentary. If its taken more seriously in that way, perhaps the seriousness of act selection will improve too.