Tweet
EUROVISION ANNOUNCE 2014 RULE CHANGES FOR FAIRER JURY
World TV PC
September 25, 2013 Wednesday 2:45 PM EST
Throughout its long history, the popular pan-European Eurovision Song
Contest has faced plenty of accusations that the results displayed
on-screen are not the full story, with a new batch of claims having
come in in recent months over the 2013 event in Malmo (Sweden).
rumours suggest that Azerbaijan, arguably the strongest and most
consistent Eurovision performer of all time (going by their short
history of competing), had representatives offering money to the
'national juries' of other competing countries, as a bribe to give
more points to their entrant Farid Mammadov (who with his song
'Hold Me' finished with 234 points and came 2nd overall[1] from the
26 finalists).
Whilst that claim is being investigated, Eurovision organisers have
confirmed that there will be rule changes to the way the 'juries'
(who are responsible for providing 50% of the input towards the scores
their nation gives to other countries (the other half comes from each
nation's public vote)) are run.
Those changes include the announcement that all names of each country's
jury will be revealed to the public in advance of the competition
as a transparency measure (as opposed to being revealed afterwards),
whilst the scores provided by individual jurors will also be published
instantly after the final results have aired, another method in
allowing viewers to potentially pinpoint suspicious voting habits
and the people behind them.
It was also announced that 'music industry professionals' will only
be eligible to sit on a panel provided they have not had such a role
for the previous two contests.
Eurovision Song Contest 'executive supervisor' Jon Ola Sand
stated: 'Tighter rules and increased openness are important for
the Eurovision Song Contest to build on its success. We want to
make sure participants, viewers and fans know that we have done,
and will always do, our utmost to secure a fair result. We believe
in the independence of every jury member [and] I believe the fact
their votes are on display will help them vote independently.'
Of course, with Eurovision being held next year on an abandoned
shipyard island[2] (in Copenhagen (Denmark) on 10 May), the potential
for a tale of creepy retribution for any 'influenced' panellist will
be greatly enhanced.
Perhaps one of the world's most simultaneously glamorous and anonymous
jobs might not have as many volunteers next year... or perhaps
Eurovision organisers are over-reacting to rumours, and Azerbaijan's
song this year really did deserve 2nd place. Whilst it is unlikely the
latter is completely true (especially given Azerbaijan's track record
with the contest's voting includes police interrogation for a handful
of local viewers who voted for rival neighbouring country Armenia) the
only publicly-available 'evidence' is below for you to try and decide:
www.youtube.com/embed/iN3d_V7KVLE?list=PLmWYEDTNOGUIMlY5RjtdamO-sAinmBmLv
www.youtube.com/embed/Oea2XGsIbvI
World TV PC
September 25, 2013 Wednesday 2:45 PM EST
Throughout its long history, the popular pan-European Eurovision Song
Contest has faced plenty of accusations that the results displayed
on-screen are not the full story, with a new batch of claims having
come in in recent months over the 2013 event in Malmo (Sweden).
rumours suggest that Azerbaijan, arguably the strongest and most
consistent Eurovision performer of all time (going by their short
history of competing), had representatives offering money to the
'national juries' of other competing countries, as a bribe to give
more points to their entrant Farid Mammadov (who with his song
'Hold Me' finished with 234 points and came 2nd overall[1] from the
26 finalists).
Whilst that claim is being investigated, Eurovision organisers have
confirmed that there will be rule changes to the way the 'juries'
(who are responsible for providing 50% of the input towards the scores
their nation gives to other countries (the other half comes from each
nation's public vote)) are run.
Those changes include the announcement that all names of each country's
jury will be revealed to the public in advance of the competition
as a transparency measure (as opposed to being revealed afterwards),
whilst the scores provided by individual jurors will also be published
instantly after the final results have aired, another method in
allowing viewers to potentially pinpoint suspicious voting habits
and the people behind them.
It was also announced that 'music industry professionals' will only
be eligible to sit on a panel provided they have not had such a role
for the previous two contests.
Eurovision Song Contest 'executive supervisor' Jon Ola Sand
stated: 'Tighter rules and increased openness are important for
the Eurovision Song Contest to build on its success. We want to
make sure participants, viewers and fans know that we have done,
and will always do, our utmost to secure a fair result. We believe
in the independence of every jury member [and] I believe the fact
their votes are on display will help them vote independently.'
Of course, with Eurovision being held next year on an abandoned
shipyard island[2] (in Copenhagen (Denmark) on 10 May), the potential
for a tale of creepy retribution for any 'influenced' panellist will
be greatly enhanced.
Perhaps one of the world's most simultaneously glamorous and anonymous
jobs might not have as many volunteers next year... or perhaps
Eurovision organisers are over-reacting to rumours, and Azerbaijan's
song this year really did deserve 2nd place. Whilst it is unlikely the
latter is completely true (especially given Azerbaijan's track record
with the contest's voting includes police interrogation for a handful
of local viewers who voted for rival neighbouring country Armenia) the
only publicly-available 'evidence' is below for you to try and decide:
www.youtube.com/embed/iN3d_V7KVLE?list=PLmWYEDTNOGUIMlY5RjtdamO-sAinmBmLv
www.youtube.com/embed/Oea2XGsIbvI