Eurovision 2010 - 25/27/29 May 2010 - Norway

Wogan just mocked the show outright - Norton shows is some respect without having to ditch the deadpan commentary.


Exactly. It is that simple. An open contest is the best - the composer led format only works when they've got someone who actually knows the market as it is today, not 20 years ago.

And if they're not performing their own songs, I think if the viewer chooses the performer they then need to give that performer 4-6 songs and have the viewer choose the song too.

Love to borrow your "no doubt" crystal ball... I simply don't agree that "dulling down" the commentary is going to cause a resurgence of serious interest in Eurovision in the UK. It simply isn't important enough to the UK.

The UK's relationship with Eurovision - probably since the late 70s (if not always) - has always been different to most other European countries - because we don't need to win it to have musical success in other European countries. We are able to do that without the contest - and as a result we aren't able to exploit the best of our native talent as other countries are.

It isn't as if all the other countries treat Eurovision like a Royal Wedding or a State Opening - other countries have similarly tongue-in-cheek commentary. It is an entertainment show - it is NOT an election... Certainly Sweden don't treat it like a peace summit in their commentary.

Personally I'd like a no-commentary (Red Button?) choice at times - without having to wait for the DVD - as I'd have loved to have been properly able to have listened to the "Ambassador's Reception"-type sketch - but I accept I am in a minority.

Another thing to remember is that in many countries Eurovision is simply the biggest show - by a HUGE amount -that they see on their TV AND can see their country taking part in, and can take part in themselves by voting.

We're lucky that we have plenty of high production value entertainment shows to watch - Strictly, Dorothy, X Factor, BGT etc. are all pretty spectacular shows in European TV terms. Imagine if you didn't have domestic shows like that on your TV every week (bliss for some ) - and Eurovision was the only time you got to see something that huge? That is why Eurovision is so much more important to other European countries than to the UK. (Chatting to Swedes I know - the importance of seeing Sweden take part in such an amazing spectacular contest in the 70s and 80s was seriously important to them nationally. I'm not sure that the UK - home of The Beatles and The Rolling Stones through Oasis and Blur to Take That - all successful across Europe - has ever had the same resonance nationally)

Considering how much Sweden invest in their own selection process I'd imagine they're one of the biggest contributors to Eurovision outside the "big four" - so should Sweden continue to struggle over the next few years any chance that "big four" might become the "big five"?

Think you're misunderstanding how and why The Big Four exist.

The EBU charge each country a licensing fee for the rights to enter, and to show, the contest. AIUI this fee is heavily based - at least for Western European members - on their populations.

Thus France (63m), Germany (82m), Spain (45m) and the UK (61m) pay the largest amount by a significant margin - as we're the four largest Western European countries. Smaller countries like Sweden (9m), Norway (4.7m), Denmark (5.4m) and Iceland (312,000) have massively smaller populations - so their licensing fees are massively less.

I don't know if it is pro-rata - but you can see why Sweden with less than 15% of the population of the UK, and Denmark with less than 7% of the population of Germany, and Iceland with a population of less than 0.5% that of France - pay hugely less to show and to enter the contest...

The reasoning goes that if the UK, France, Germany and Spain were not guaranteed to appear in the final (for instance if they had been relegated in the days of relegation, or knocked out in the semifinals now) their national broadcasters would seriously consider pulling out - and taking a significant amount of funding, and just as importantly - prestige - with them.

Sure Sweden's SVT spends a huge amount on their Melodifestivalen selection show - but it is a tradition in Sweden that dates back decades (I have the 50 years of Melodifestivalen DVDs released a few years ago...) The final is often their most watched show of the year s - so they do invest in it - just as ITV do in BGT and X Factor. The point is that they still only pay a small amount to actually licence the show - and if they pulled out it wouldn't have the same impact.

Of course we're in a slightly strange situation that the Swedes effectively run the contest (because they're so good at Melodifestivalen) - with Svante (a former SVT producer) Exec Producing the contest, and over the last 10 years or Swedish production talent has been evident at many contests (whether directing it, sound supervising it or providing the OB facilities for it...)

There are other hugely populous countries in the contest - Russia (142m), Turkey (72m), Ukraine (46m) - but AIUI they are deemed to be less important to the contest (rightly or wrongly)

did they have a big screen in the UK like they did in germany? we don't seem to be interested in this competition ever!

When did Italy's RAI pull out ? They are certainly a major country conspicuous by their absence ?

All that is for sure is It has not participated since 1997, I dare say if it come back it would become the Big 5.

There is talk of trying to get them back in, I dare say to grab more money that to hear people sing.

There's been rumours that Russia now pays a higher participation fee than Spain. Though I guess the EBU want to keep things the way they are as Russia is guaranteed to get through the semis regardless of what they send (as we saw this year) while Spain certainly does not have that power!

Svante has previously said at some fan press conference that if Italy were to return then there would be a big 5, though I think that having missed so many years, this would piss a lot of countries off.

Italy pulled out after 1997. They didn't compete in Birmingham in 1998, and haven't returned since AFAIK.

Austria is also a high-profile drop-out - they decided not to appear in 2006 (with the broadcaster talking quite negatively about the contest), but returned in 2007. However they didn't do well when and didn't enter in 2008, 2009 or 2010.

Cheers for the explanation noggin. Also one area I may be wrong on too is whether the Big 4 is actually those who contribute most to the Eurovision Song Contest or whether it's actually those who contribute most to the EBU?

I guess as Germany is the first of the "big 4" to win since the UK in the late nineties it's also the first song to win that hasn't featured in the semi-finals since they were introduced a few years ago. France didn't do too bad either this year and Spain did better than deserved - but have to wonder if there really is any benefit of not featuring in the semi-finals other than the guaranteed place. After all, if they can't get through the semis there is little chance of them winning anyway - no doubt about it this year that Germany would have qualified and the UK not, and nobody can really argue with that.

It's the second, Greece in 2005 wasn't in the semi.

Germany is the first of the "Big Four" to win since the semi-finals were introduced.

Greece was the first country to win that didn't featured in a semi-final - but this was in the days where there was only a single semi-final and lots more songs were automatically in the final (based on their performance the previous year)

The original single semi-final was introduced to avoid the automatic relegation that happened to poorly performing non-"Big Four" countries - previously if you did badly one year, you had to sit out the following year (*). With the introduction of the single semi-final if you did badly one year, you had to go through the semi-final process the following year -which meant you still got to take part in the contest every year.


(*) There were some nuances to these rules ISTR.