Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Eurovision Song Contest 2016: Coming to America at last!
- Thread starter dXTC
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
"We have a valid televoting result" - how can you say that with a straight face when the Australian phone numbers had a "not connected" message? Helpline was also "jammed" and Facebook was full of posts saying that voting wasn't working. Yet this is a "valid" result?
The public voting really was interesting twist. I ended up liking Ukraine's entry but think Australia had the better song.
Poland going from last place with Jury vote to right up the voting table with the public vote was the biggest shock.
But overall it was a great night. Måns & Pietra were the real stars for me ....
My favourite songs of the night ...
Made of Stars
Pioneer
J'ai Cherché
Heartbeat
Sound of Silence
Slow Down
1944
.
Poland going from last place with Jury vote to right up the voting table with the public vote was the biggest shock.
But overall it was a great night. Måns & Pietra were the real stars for me ....
My favourite songs of the night ...
Made of Stars
Pioneer
J'ai Cherché
Heartbeat
Sound of Silence
Slow Down
1944
.
Last edited:
The organisers apparently had a problem with Australia's mentioning FaceTime, yet Ukraine's made it through unscathed...
The voting results presentation was great this year. Poland surprised me. Ukraine's win is well deserved.
Russia is European.
Because the lyrics, edited slightly for clarity, are "growing tired [...] trying to feel your love through FaceTime [because] you're not here with me". While the official lyrics do say "face time", that doesn't make sense in context.
But even then, I think FaceTime was used to describe video calling in a familiar word - Like how people interchangeably use 'iPod' to mean 'MP3 Player'
Compared with Ukraine's political message, I feel the mention of FaceTime in a way that wasn't even meant to advertise anything is less of an offence. An offence non the less.
FaceTime as advertising seems to be a minor problem compared to the political charge of the Ukrainian song. See all for yourselves:
Performer: Jamala
Song title: 1944
Music by: Jamala
Lyrics by: Jamala
1944
1
When strangers are coming...
They come to your house,
They kill you all
and say,
We’re not guilty
not guilty.
Where is your mind?
Humanity cries.
You think you are gods.
But everyone dies.
Don't swallow my soul.
Our souls
Yaşlığıma toyalmadım
Men bu yerde yaşalmadım
Yaşlığıma toyalmadım
Men bu yerde yaşalmadım
2
We could build a future
Where people are free
to live and love.
The happiest time.
Where is your heart?
Humanity rise.
You think you are gods
But everyone dies.
Don't swallow my soul.
Our souls.
Yaşlığıma toyalmadım
Men bu yerde yaşalmadım
Yaşlığıma toyalmadım
Men bu yerde yaşalmadım
The lyrics for "1944" concern the deportation of the Crimean Tatars, in the 1940s, by the Soviet Union at the hands of Joseph Stalin.
Jamala has said in an interview that the song also reminds her of her own family living in Crimea nowadays, claiming that since the 2014 Russian annexation of Crimea "the Crimean Tatars are on occupied territory".
Eurovision rules prohibit songs with lyrics that could be interpreted as having "political content".
No comment.
Thats what I feel - Australia got pulled up on what was in my opinion a minor issue that was not intended, where as Ukraine's song was written as a political song :'(
Sounds like a lot of begrudging going on to me. Anyone with a bit of history of Eurovision will know that politics has ALWAYS played a part. Dana International win was scene as a political vote against treatment of transgender and homosexuals in Israel and Middle East. Heck you could argue that if political / historical lyrics should be censored then Waterloo by Abba should have not won. I have no doubt the fact that they used the historical aspect to get around the political, but hey ho.
From jury and block voting, politics will and always will be a part of Eurovision.
If you wanted to see some real 'drama' and politics at play - then you should have hoped Russia won. Seeing as how Eurovision is arguably the 'gayest' event on the calendar globally and even Sweden completely embraced that throughout the week and in its presentation and commentary, it would have been a real stumbler to see how a country who has such draconian laws and treatments of homosexual men and women would have been able to host and hold venue to the biggest gay audience in the world.
Now that would have been really politically interesting to see ...
From jury and block voting, politics will and always will be a part of Eurovision.
If you wanted to see some real 'drama' and politics at play - then you should have hoped Russia won. Seeing as how Eurovision is arguably the 'gayest' event on the calendar globally and even Sweden completely embraced that throughout the week and in its presentation and commentary, it would have been a real stumbler to see how a country who has such draconian laws and treatments of homosexual men and women would have been able to host and hold venue to the biggest gay audience in the world.
Now that would have been really politically interesting to see ...
No disagreement on the apsects you mentioned, nevertheless we are talking about a song with a clear political charge in a certain geopolitical situation. A song that has won, a song that does not comply with the existing strict rules of Eurovision.
It honestly just sounds like sour grapes to me. Australia even being in the Eurovision is a bending of what were these existing strict rules.
I think Australia had the better song personally, but those voting at home decided Ukraine and moreover Russia had the better song for whatever reasons and a lot of those will be political regardless of the content of the actual song.
These 'strict' rules you speak of Eurovision have always been mandible and fluid. They change continuously to suit the current climate. Whether we agree or disagree.
And let again, what you mention concerns the circle of participants that was approved. Thus no country broke the existing rule.
What concerns the "bending" of those rules in relation to Australia's participation. Eligibility to participate is not determined by geographic inclusion within the continent of Europe, despite the "Euro" in "Eurovision" – nor does it have any relation to the European Union. Several countries geographically outside the boundaries of Europe have competed: Israel and Cyprus in Western Asia (Cyprus is a member of the Council of Europe and a member state of the European Union), since 1973 and 1981 respectively; Australia in the Australian continent, in 2015[29] and Morocco, in North Africa, in the 1980 competition alone. In addition, several transcontinental countries with only part of their territory in Europe have competed: Turkey, since 1975; Russia, since 1994; Armenia, since 2006; Georgia, since 2007; and Azerbaijan, which made its first appearance in the 2008 edition.
What concerns the "bending" of those rules in relation to Australia's participation. Eligibility to participate is not determined by geographic inclusion within the continent of Europe, despite the "Euro" in "Eurovision" – nor does it have any relation to the European Union. Several countries geographically outside the boundaries of Europe have competed: Israel and Cyprus in Western Asia (Cyprus is a member of the Council of Europe and a member state of the European Union), since 1973 and 1981 respectively; Australia in the Australian continent, in 2015[29] and Morocco, in North Africa, in the 1980 competition alone. In addition, several transcontinental countries with only part of their territory in Europe have competed: Turkey, since 1975; Russia, since 1994; Armenia, since 2006; Georgia, since 2007; and Azerbaijan, which made its first appearance in the 2008 edition.
Last edited: